Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
122 lines (99 loc) · 14.2 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

122 lines (99 loc) · 14.2 KB

Okay, let's perform a deep security analysis of the Faraday TOTP generator project, 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 Faraday project, focusing on the core components (HTML, JavaScript, jsOTP library, and local storage interaction). We aim to identify potential vulnerabilities, assess their impact, and propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies tailored to Faraday's design and constraints. The analysis will consider the project's goals of simplicity, offline functionality, and user-friendliness. We will also evaluate the effectiveness of existing security controls and identify gaps.

  • Scope: The scope of this analysis includes:

    • The faraday.html file (the complete application).
    • The interaction with the jsOTP library.
    • The use of the browser's localStorage.
    • The overall data flow and control flow within the application.
    • The deployment model (primarily as a local HTML file).
    • The build process considerations.
    • The identified business and security posture.

    The scope excludes:

    • The security of external services that utilize TOTP codes generated by Faraday.
    • The security of the user's device and operating system.
    • The internal workings of the browser's rendering and JavaScript engine (beyond standard web security considerations).

  • Methodology:

    1. Architecture and Data Flow Review: We will analyze the provided C4 diagrams and descriptions to understand the application's architecture, components, and data flow. This includes identifying trust boundaries and potential attack surfaces.
    2. Threat Modeling: Based on the architecture and data flow, we will identify potential threats, considering common web application vulnerabilities and specific risks associated with TOTP generation and storage. We will use the STRIDE model (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) as a framework.
    3. Code Review (Inferred): Since we don't have the actual source code, we will infer potential code-level vulnerabilities based on the project description, intended functionality, and common security best practices. This is a crucial limitation, and a real code review would be significantly more precise.
    4. Security Control Evaluation: We will assess the effectiveness of the existing and recommended security controls in mitigating the identified threats.
    5. Mitigation Strategy Recommendation: For each identified vulnerability, we will propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies that are practical within the context of Faraday's design constraints (single HTML file, offline functionality).

2. Security Implications of Key Components

  • faraday.html (HTML, CSS, JavaScript):

    • Threats:
      • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If user input (the secret key) is not properly sanitized and escaped before being displayed or used in the DOM, an attacker could inject malicious JavaScript code. This is a critical concern. Even though the application is offline, XSS can still lead to key exfiltration if the user ever opens the compromised file online or if the attacker gains access to the user's device.
      • Input Validation Bypass: Weak or missing input validation could allow an attacker to provide malformed secret keys, potentially causing unexpected behavior or crashes in the jsOTP library.
      • DOM Manipulation: Malicious JavaScript (via XSS or a compromised dependency) could manipulate the DOM to display incorrect TOTP codes or redirect the user to a phishing site (if online).
      • Denial of Service (DoS): While less critical for an offline application, excessively long or complex input could potentially cause the browser to freeze or crash.
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Robust Input Validation: Implement strict validation of the secret key, ensuring it conforms to the expected Base32 format and length. Use a regular expression specifically designed for Base32 validation. Reject any input that doesn't match.
      • Output Encoding/Escaping: Always HTML-encode any user-provided data before displaying it in the DOM. Use appropriate JavaScript escaping functions when manipulating the DOM.
      • Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement a strict CSP to prevent the execution of any inline JavaScript and restrict the sources from which scripts can be loaded. This is a crucial defense against XSS. A suitable CSP would likely be: default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'sha256-...'; style-src 'self'; img-src 'self'; connect-src 'none';. The sha256-... would need to be the hash of the jsOTP library if it's included inline, or the URL of the library if it's loaded externally. connect-src 'none' is essential for enforcing the offline nature.
      • Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) Protection: If using regular expressions for validation, ensure they are not vulnerable to ReDoS attacks. Test the regex against known ReDoS patterns.
      • Consider using a templating engine: Although project is single page application, using template engine will help to avoid XSS vulnerabilities.

  • jsOTP Library:

    • Threats:
      • Vulnerabilities in the Library: The jsOTP library itself could contain vulnerabilities, either in its cryptographic implementation or in its handling of input.
      • Incorrect Usage: The Faraday application might use the jsOTP library incorrectly, leading to weakened security.
      • Supply Chain Attack: If the jsOTP library is loaded from an external source (e.g., a CDN), an attacker could compromise that source and replace the library with a malicious version.
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Regular Updates: Keep the jsOTP library up-to-date with the latest version to address any known vulnerabilities. This is critical.
      • Verify Integrity: If loading jsOTP from an external source, use Subresource Integrity (SRI) attributes in the <script> tag to ensure that the loaded file matches the expected hash. This prevents the execution of a tampered library. Example: <script src="https://example.com/jsotp.js" integrity="sha384-..." crossorigin="anonymous"></script>.
      • Include Locally: The best approach for Faraday, given its offline focus, is to include the jsOTP library directly within the faraday.html file. This eliminates the need for external connections and SRI, simplifying the CSP and reducing the attack surface.
      • Code Review (of jsOTP): Ideally, a security review of the jsOTP library's source code would be performed to identify any potential vulnerabilities. This is outside the scope of this analysis but is a recommended practice.
      • Correct API Usage: Carefully review the jsOTP documentation to ensure that the library is being used correctly, particularly regarding the handling of secret keys and time synchronization.

  • localStorage:

    • Threats:
      • Data Exfiltration: If an attacker gains access to the user's device (physically or through malware), they can access the localStorage data and retrieve the stored secret keys.
      • XSS-Based Access: An XSS vulnerability in any website running in the same origin (which, for local files, is often the entire filesystem) could allow an attacker to read the localStorage data. This highlights the importance of CSP.
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Encryption: Implement client-side encryption of the secret keys before storing them in localStorage. The user should provide a strong password that is used to derive an encryption key. This password must not be stored. Use a robust encryption algorithm like AES-GCM. The JavaScript Web Crypto API provides suitable functions for this.
      • Salting and Hashing: Use Password-Based Key Derivation Function 2 (PBKDF2) to securely derive the encryption key from the user's password. This adds significant computational cost to brute-force attacks.
      • Clear Guidance: Provide clear instructions to the user on the importance of choosing a strong password and the risks associated with storing secret keys.
      • "Don't Save" Option: Offer an option to not save the secret key in localStorage. This is the most secure option, but it requires the user to re-enter the key each time.

3. Architecture, Components, and Data Flow (Inferences)

Based on the C4 diagrams and descriptions, we can infer the following:

  • Data Flow:

    1. User enters the secret key into an HTML input field.
    2. JavaScript code reads the input value.
    3. (Optional) The JavaScript code encrypts the secret key using a user-provided password.
    4. The (encrypted) secret key is stored in localStorage.
    5. When generating a TOTP code, the JavaScript code retrieves the (encrypted) secret key from localStorage.
    6. (Optional) The secret key is decrypted.
    7. The secret key and the current time are passed to the jsOTP library.
    8. The jsOTP library generates the TOTP code.
    9. The JavaScript code displays the TOTP code in the UI.

  • Trust Boundaries:

    • The primary trust boundary is between the user's device and the outside world. Since Faraday is designed to be offline, this boundary is relatively strong.
    • Another trust boundary exists between the Faraday application and the jsOTP library. We must trust that jsOTP is correctly implemented and free of vulnerabilities.
    • A weaker trust boundary exists between the Faraday application and the browser's localStorage. We rely on the browser's security mechanisms to protect localStorage, but we also need to implement our own protections (encryption).

4. Tailored Security Considerations

  • Offline Operation: The offline nature of Faraday significantly reduces the attack surface. Network-based attacks are largely mitigated. However, this makes client-side security (XSS, localStorage protection) even more critical.
  • Simplicity: The project's emphasis on simplicity is a double-edged sword. It reduces the potential for complex vulnerabilities, but it also limits the ability to implement advanced security features. We must find a balance between security and simplicity.
  • User Responsibility: The user is responsible for the secure generation and management of their secret keys outside of Faraday. This is a significant assumption, and clear documentation is essential to guide users.
  • Single HTML File: The single-file constraint makes deployment easy but also means that all security measures must be contained within that file. This reinforces the importance of a strong CSP and careful code organization.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Summary and Prioritization)

Here's a summary of the recommended mitigation strategies, prioritized by importance:

  • High Priority:

    • Implement a strict Content Security Policy (CSP). This is the most important defense against XSS.
    • Implement robust input validation for the secret key. Prevent malformed input from reaching the jsOTP library.
    • Encrypt secret keys before storing them in localStorage. Use a strong encryption algorithm (AES-GCM) and a key derived from a user-provided password using PBKDF2.
    • Include the jsOTP library directly within the faraday.html file. Avoid external dependencies and simplify the CSP.
    • Keep the jsOTP library up-to-date. Regularly check for new releases and apply updates promptly.
    • Provide clear and comprehensive documentation. Guide users on secure key generation, storage, and password selection.

  • Medium Priority:

    • Offer a "Don't Save" option for secret keys. This provides the highest level of security, at the cost of convenience.
    • Use a secure random number generator if implementing a "generate secret" feature. The Web Crypto API provides crypto.getRandomValues().
    • Test input validation and encryption/decryption logic thoroughly. Ensure that edge cases and error conditions are handled correctly.
    • Consider using a templating engine.

  • Low Priority (but still recommended):

    • Implement a build process with linting, SAST scanning, and (potentially) minification. This improves code quality and helps to identify potential vulnerabilities early.
    • Perform a security review of the jsOTP library's source code (if possible).

Addressing the Questions and Assumptions:

  • Compliance Requirements: While no specific compliance requirements are mentioned, it's good practice to consider general data privacy principles (e.g., minimizing data collection, providing transparency to users).
  • Expected User Base: The expected user base is likely technically savvy users who understand the basics of 2FA and are looking for a simple, offline solution.
  • Future Features: Adding features like support for different TOTP algorithms or hardware security keys would significantly increase the complexity and attack surface. These should be carefully considered and implemented with security as a primary concern.
  • Support and Maintenance: Regular updates (especially for jsOTP) are essential to maintain security. A plan for addressing reported vulnerabilities should be in place.
  • Security Budget: Even without a dedicated budget, many of the recommended security measures (CSP, input validation, encryption) can be implemented with minimal cost. Open-source SAST tools can be used in the build process.

This deep analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the security considerations for the Faraday project. The most critical vulnerabilities are related to XSS and the insecure storage of secret keys in localStorage. By implementing the recommended mitigation strategies, the project can significantly enhance its security posture while maintaining its simplicity and offline functionality. The inferred nature of this code review is a limitation; a real code review would be much more precise.