Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
139 lines (118 loc) · 11.2 KB

File metadata and controls

139 lines (118 loc) · 11.2 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for lllyasviel/fooocus

Objective: To compromise application using Fooocus to achieve unauthorized access, data manipulation, denial of service, or code execution on the server hosting the application.

Attack Tree Visualization

High-Risk Sub-Tree:

  • Compromise Application Using Fooocus [CRITICAL NODE - Root Goal]
    • 1. Exploit Fooocus Input (Prompt Injection & Manipulation) [CRITICAL NODE - Input Vector] [HIGH RISK PATH]
      • 1.1. Prompt Injection to Exfiltrate Data [HIGH RISK PATH]
        • 1.1.1. Craft prompts to trigger Fooocus to reveal internal paths, configurations, or model details in generated images or logs.
      • 1.2. Prompt Injection for Resource Exhaustion (DoS) [HIGH RISK PATH]
        • 1.2.2. Send rapid bursts of prompts to overload the system. [HIGH RISK PATH]
      • 1.3. Prompt Injection to Generate Harmful Content (Reputational Damage - Indirect Compromise) [HIGH RISK PATH]
        • 1.3.1. Generate illegal, offensive, or policy-violating images, damaging the application's reputation and potentially leading to legal/regulatory issues.
    • 2. Exploit Fooocus Dependencies (Models & Libraries) [CRITICAL NODE - Dependency Risk] [HIGH RISK PATH - Malicious Models]
      • 2.1. Malicious Model Injection/Substitution [HIGH RISK PATH]
        • 2.1.1. If the application allows users to specify models or model sources, inject a malicious Stable Diffusion model. [HIGH RISK PATH]
          • 2.1.1.1. Malicious model designed to exfiltrate data during inference. [HIGH RISK PATH]
      • 2.2. Vulnerable Python Libraries [HIGH RISK PATH - Vulnerable Libraries]
        • 2.2.1. Exploit known vulnerabilities in Python libraries used by Fooocus (PyTorch, Transformers, etc.). [HIGH RISK PATH]
          • 2.2.1.1. Outdated libraries with known remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities. [HIGH RISK PATH]
    • 3. Exploit Fooocus Configuration & Settings [CRITICAL NODE - Configuration Risk]
      • 3.2. Misconfiguration during Integration [HIGH RISK PATH - Integration Errors]
        • 3.2.1. Application developers misconfigure Fooocus integration, creating vulnerabilities. [HIGH RISK PATH]
          • 3.2.1.2. Improper handling of user inputs passed to Fooocus, leading to injection vulnerabilities. [HIGH RISK PATH]

Attack Vectors:

  • Prompt Injection to Exfiltrate Data (1.1)
  • Prompt Injection for Resource Exhaustion (DoS) - specifically rapid bursts (1.2.2)
  • Prompt Injection to Generate Harmful Content (1.3)
  • Likelihood: Medium to High (Prompt injection is a common vulnerability in applications using LLMs).
  • Impact: Medium to High (Information disclosure, service disruption, reputational damage).
  • Effort: Low (Requires basic prompt engineering skills and readily available tools).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic understanding of prompt engineering and web application interaction).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High (Subtle data leaks and sophisticated prompt injection can be hard to detect automatically).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement robust input validation and sanitization, focusing on preventing obvious injection attempts.
    • Implement rate limiting to mitigate DoS via rapid prompt submission.
    • Implement content filtering to reduce the generation of harmful content.
    • Monitor logs and outputs for signs of data leakage or malicious activity.
  • Attack Vector: Craft prompts to trick Fooocus into revealing internal paths, configurations, or model details in generated images or logs.
  • Likelihood: Medium (Requires precise prompt crafting, but prompt injection is a known issue).
  • Impact: Medium (Information disclosure of potentially sensitive system details).
  • Effort: Low (Prompt engineering skills, readily available tools).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic prompt engineering).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High (Subtle data leaks in images or logs can be hard to detect automatically).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Minimize logging of sensitive information.
    • Sanitize or filter sensitive data from logs and generated outputs.
    • Regularly review generated images and logs for potential information leakage.
  • Attack Vector: Send rapid bursts of prompts to overload the system (1.2.2).
  • Likelihood: High (Simple to execute and effective against systems without rate limiting).
  • Impact: Medium (Temporary service disruption and resource exhaustion).
  • Effort: Low (Simple scripting or readily available DoS tools).
  • Skill Level: Low (No specialized skills needed).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (DoS attacks are generally detectable through network and resource monitoring).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement robust rate limiting on prompt submissions.
    • Monitor server resource usage (CPU, memory, GPU) and set up alerts.
    • Consider a queueing system for image generation requests.
  • Attack Vector: Generate illegal, offensive, or policy-violating images using prompts.
  • Likelihood: High (Relatively easy to generate harmful content, especially bypassing basic filters).
  • Impact: Medium to High (Reputational damage, legal/regulatory issues, user trust erosion).
  • Effort: Low (Prompt engineering skills, readily available tools).
  • Skill Level: Low to Medium (Basic prompt engineering, understanding of content policies).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Automated content filtering is improving but still imperfect, human review may be needed).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement content filtering mechanisms.
    • Provide user reporting mechanisms for inappropriate content.
    • Clearly define terms of service and acceptable use policies.
  • Attack Vectors:
    • Malicious Model Injection/Substitution (2.1)
    • Vulnerable Python Libraries (2.2)
  • Likelihood: Varies (Malicious models - Low, Vulnerable Libraries - Medium).
  • Impact: High (Data breach, remote code execution, service disruption).
  • Effort: Medium (Malicious models - Medium, Vulnerable Libraries - Low to Medium).
  • Skill Level: Medium to High (Malicious models - Medium to High, Vulnerable Libraries - Medium).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium to High (Malicious models - High, Vulnerable Libraries - Medium).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Strictly control model sources and implement model validation (digital signatures, checksums).
    • Regularly scan and update Python dependencies for vulnerabilities.
    • Use virtual environments for dependency isolation.
  • Attack Vector: If the application allows user-specified models, inject a malicious Stable Diffusion model, specifically designed for data exfiltration (2.1.1.1).
  • Likelihood: Low (Requires application to allow user-specified models and lack of validation).
  • Impact: High (Data breach, exfiltration of sensitive information during model use).
  • Effort: Medium (Creating a malicious model, injecting it into the application).
  • Skill Level: Medium to High (Model creation/modification, understanding of model loading).
  • Detection Difficulty: High (Malicious behavior within model inference is very difficult to detect).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Strongly discourage or disable user-specified model loading.
    • If user-specified models are necessary, implement rigorous model validation and sandboxing.
    • Use only trusted and verified model sources.
  • Attack Vector: Exploit known vulnerabilities in outdated Python libraries, specifically RCE vulnerabilities (2.2.1.1).
  • Likelihood: Medium (Depends on patching practices, known vulnerabilities are common).
  • Impact: High (Full system compromise, remote code execution).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Exploits for known vulnerabilities are often publicly available).
  • Skill Level: Medium (Exploit usage, basic system administration).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Vulnerability scanners can detect outdated libraries, intrusion detection systems might detect exploit attempts).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement a robust dependency scanning and update process.
    • Keep all Python libraries and dependencies up-to-date with security patches.
    • Use vulnerability scanning tools in CI/CD pipelines.
  • Attack Vector: Misconfiguration during integration, specifically improper handling of user inputs leading to injection vulnerabilities (3.2.1.2).
  • Likelihood: Medium (Common vulnerability in web applications integrating external components).
  • Impact: Medium to High (Depending on injection type - prompt, command, etc. - data manipulation, DoS, RCE).
  • Effort: Low to Medium (Input fuzzing, vulnerability testing).
  • Skill Level: Medium (Web security testing, understanding of injection vulnerabilities).
  • Detection Difficulty: Medium (Input validation testing, security code review can detect these vulnerabilities).
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Follow secure development practices during Fooocus integration.
    • Conduct thorough code reviews, focusing on input handling and integration points.
    • Perform security testing (penetration testing, vulnerability scanning) of the integrated application.
    • Properly sanitize and validate all user inputs before passing them to Fooocus or any other part of the application.