Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
101 lines (77 loc) · 12 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

101 lines (77 loc) · 12 KB

Okay, let's perform a deep security analysis of better_errors, based on the provided security design review.

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: The primary objective is to conduct a thorough security analysis of the better_errors gem, focusing on its key components and their interactions. We aim to identify potential vulnerabilities, assess their impact, and propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will consider the gem's intended use (development environment only) and the inherent risks associated with exposing application internals. We will pay particular attention to:

    • Information Disclosure: Preventing unintentional leakage of sensitive data.
    • Code Execution: Mitigating risks associated with the interactive REPL.
    • Injection Attacks: Protecting against XSS and other injection vulnerabilities.
    • Dependency-Related Risks: Addressing vulnerabilities in third-party libraries.

  • Scope: The analysis will cover the better_errors gem itself, its core components (middleware, error page rendering, REPL), and its interactions with the Ruby/Rails application and the developer's browser. We will not analyze the security of the application being debugged, except where better_errors might exacerbate existing vulnerabilities. We will focus on the latest stable version of better_errors and its documented features.

  • Methodology:

    1. Component Breakdown: We'll analyze each key component identified in the C4 diagrams (Middleware, Error Page, REPL) and the build process.
    2. Threat Modeling: For each component, we'll identify potential threats based on the business risks, security posture, and design. We'll use a combination of STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) and OWASP Top 10 principles.
    3. Vulnerability Analysis: We'll assess the likelihood and impact of each identified threat.
    4. Mitigation Recommendations: We'll propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies tailored to better_errors and its intended use. These will go beyond generic security advice.
    5. Code Review (Inferred): While we don't have direct access to the codebase, we will infer potential vulnerabilities based on the gem's functionality and documentation, and suggest areas where code review should be focused.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Let's break down the security implications of each key component:

  • Better Errors Middleware:

    • Threats:

      • Information Disclosure: The middleware intercepts exceptions and gathers context information, including local variables, environment variables, and stack traces. If not handled carefully, this information could be leaked to the browser.
      • Denial of Service: If the middleware's exception handling logic is flawed, it could be vulnerable to resource exhaustion attacks (e.g., triggering excessively large stack traces or variable dumps).
      • Tampering: While less likely, it's theoretically possible for an attacker to manipulate the exception handling process itself, potentially influencing the data displayed or even hijacking control flow.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Strict Variable Filtering: Enhance the existing "Hiding Variables" feature. Provide more granular control, perhaps using regular expressions or whitelists/blacklists. Offer pre-configured profiles (e.g., "Strict," "Moderate," "Loose") for different levels of sensitivity. Specifically, recommend developers to create a .better_errors.yml file to configure variable hiding.
      • Data Size Limits: Implement limits on the size of data displayed in the error page (e.g., maximum string length, maximum number of array elements). This mitigates DoS risks and prevents excessively large responses. Specifically, add truncation logic within the middleware to limit the size of variables before they are rendered.
      • Exception Handling Hardening: Thoroughly test the middleware's exception handling logic to ensure it's robust against unexpected inputs and errors. Use fuzzing techniques to identify potential vulnerabilities. Specifically, recommend the use of a fuzzing library like rack-test to test the middleware with various malformed requests.
      • Review eval usage: Carefully review any use of eval or similar dynamic code execution within the middleware, as this is a common source of vulnerabilities.

  • Error Page (HTML, CSS, JS):

    • Threats:

      • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If user-supplied data or error messages are not properly escaped, an attacker could inject malicious JavaScript code into the error page. This is a major concern.
      • Information Disclosure: Even with variable filtering, subtle leaks of information could occur through HTML comments, CSS styles, or JavaScript variables.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Robust Output Encoding: Use a dedicated HTML escaping library (e.g., ERB::Util.html_escape or a more comprehensive solution like Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer) to encode all data displayed in the error page, including variable values, error messages, and stack traces. Do not rely solely on basic string escaping.
      • Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement a strict CSP to limit the sources of scripts, styles, and other resources that can be loaded in the error page. This is a critical defense-in-depth measure against XSS. Specifically, recommend a CSP that disallows inline scripts (script-src 'self') and restricts other resources to trusted origins.
      • Subresource Integrity (SRI): If external JavaScript or CSS files are used, use SRI to ensure that they haven't been tampered with.
      • HTML Sanitization: Consider using an HTML sanitizer (e.g., Loofah) to remove any potentially dangerous HTML tags or attributes from the error page content. This is particularly important if user-supplied data is displayed.
      • Regular expression validation: Validate that the input received by the error page matches a safe and expected format.

  • Interactive REPL:

    • Threats:

      • Arbitrary Code Execution: The REPL allows developers to execute arbitrary Ruby code in the context of the exception. If the development server is exposed to untrusted networks (e.g., the internet, a shared network), an attacker could potentially gain full control of the application. This is the highest risk component.
      • Information Disclosure: The REPL can be used to access and inspect sensitive data within the application.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Network Isolation: Strongly emphasize that the development server should never be exposed to untrusted networks. Provide clear warnings in the documentation and, if possible, detect and warn about potentially dangerous network configurations (e.g., binding to 0.0.0.0).
      • IP Address Restriction: Implement a mechanism to restrict access to the REPL based on IP address. Allow only connections from localhost (127.0.0.1 and ::1) by default. Provide a configuration option to allow specific IP addresses or ranges. Specifically, add a configuration option like BetterErrors.allow_ip = '192.168.1.0/24'.
      • Authentication (Optional): For an extra layer of security, consider adding a simple authentication mechanism (e.g., a shared secret) to the REPL. This would make it more difficult for an attacker to exploit the REPL even if they gain network access.
      • REPL Command Whitelisting (Advanced): As a more advanced mitigation, consider implementing a whitelist of allowed REPL commands. This would limit the attacker's capabilities even if they gain access to the REPL. This is likely complex to implement.
      • Disable REPL by Default: Consider making the REPL an opt-in feature, disabled by default. This would force developers to explicitly enable it, making them more aware of the security implications.

  • Build Process:

    • Threats:
      • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Outdated or vulnerable dependencies can introduce security risks into better_errors.
      • Compromised Build Environment: If the developer's machine or the build server is compromised, malicious code could be injected into the gem.
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Automated Dependency Updates: Use tools like Dependabot or Bundler's built-in update features to automatically update dependencies and address known vulnerabilities. Specifically, recommend configuring Dependabot to create pull requests for dependency updates.
      • Vulnerability Scanning: Use a vulnerability scanner (e.g., bundler-audit, gemnasium) to identify known vulnerabilities in dependencies. Integrate this into the CI/CD pipeline.
      • Secure Build Environment: Ensure that the build environment is secure and protected from unauthorized access. Use strong passwords, keep software up to date, and use a dedicated build server if possible.
      • Code Signing (Optional): Consider signing the gem to ensure its integrity and authenticity. This would make it more difficult for an attacker to distribute a modified version of the gem.

3. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Summary & Prioritization)

Here's a prioritized summary of the most critical mitigation strategies:

  1. High Priority (Must Implement):

    • Network Isolation: Emphasize strongly that the development server must not be exposed to untrusted networks. Document this clearly and repeatedly.
    • IP Address Restriction: Restrict REPL access to localhost by default, with a configurable option to allow specific IPs.
    • Robust Output Encoding: Use a dedicated HTML escaping library and/or HTML sanitizer to prevent XSS.
    • Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement a strict CSP to mitigate XSS and other code injection attacks.
    • Automated Dependency Updates: Use Dependabot or similar to keep dependencies up to date.
    • Strict Variable Filtering: Improve variable hiding configuration, add size limits.

  2. Medium Priority (Strongly Recommended):

    • Vulnerability Scanning: Integrate dependency vulnerability scanning into the build process.
    • Exception Handling Hardening: Thoroughly test and fuzz the middleware's exception handling.
    • Disable REPL by Default: Make the REPL an opt-in feature.

  3. Low Priority (Consider Implementing):

    • REPL Authentication: Add a simple authentication mechanism to the REPL.
    • Code Signing: Sign the gem to ensure its integrity.
    • REPL Command Whitelisting: (Advanced) Implement a whitelist of allowed REPL commands.

4. Addressing Questions and Assumptions

  • Compliance Requirements: If the application being debugged has specific compliance requirements (PCI DSS, HIPAA, etc.), the recommendations for handling sensitive data in error pages become even more critical. Variable filtering must be extremely strict, and the REPL should likely be disabled entirely, even in development. Consider providing specific guidance for these scenarios.
  • Developer Expertise: Assume a range of expertise. Provide clear, concise documentation with examples. Offer both basic and advanced configuration options. Include security warnings prominently.
  • Existing Security Practices: If the development team has existing security practices, integrate the better_errors recommendations into those practices. For example, add better_errors configuration to code review checklists.

The key takeaway is that better_errors, while incredibly useful for development, introduces significant security risks if not used carefully. The recommendations above are designed to mitigate these risks and allow developers to use the gem safely and effectively. The most important aspect is to prevent the development server from being exposed to any untrusted network.