Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
86 lines (70 loc) · 12.2 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

86 lines (70 loc) · 12.2 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for paper-trail-gem/paper_trail

Objective: To gain unauthorized access to sensitive historical data or manipulate the application's state by exploiting vulnerabilities or misconfigurations related to PaperTrail's versioning and auditing features.

Attack Tree Visualization

Attack Goal: Compromise Application via PaperTrail Exploitation
├───[AND] Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│   └───[AND] 1.4 Lack of Granular Access Control on Version Attributes **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│       └───[LEAF] 1.4.1 PaperTrail configured to track sensitive attributes without implementing attribute-level access control, allowing unauthorized viewing of sensitive changes. **[CRITICAL NODE]**
│
├───[AND] Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│   └───[OR] 2. Exploit Data Leakage in Versioned Data **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│       ├───[AND] 2.1 Sensitive Data Stored in Versioned Attributes **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│       │   └───[LEAF] 2.1.1 Developers mistakenly include sensitive information (passwords, API keys, PII) in attributes tracked by PaperTrail. **[CRITICAL NODE]**
│       │
│       ├───[AND] 2.2 Insecure Storage or Transmission of Version Data **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│       │   └───[LEAF] 2.2.1 Version data stored in plaintext in database without encryption. **[CRITICAL NODE]**
│       │
│       └───[AND] 2.3 Long-Term Retention of Sensitive Data in Versions **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│           └───[LEAF] 2.3.1 Application retains versions indefinitely, increasing the window of opportunity for attackers to access historical sensitive data. **[CRITICAL NODE]**
│
├───[AND] Manipulate Application State via Version Tampering
│   └───[OR] 3. Forge or Modify Version Records **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│       └───[AND] 3.1 Direct Database Manipulation of Version Records **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
│           └───[LEAF] 3.1.1 Attacker gains direct database access (e.g., via SQL injection or compromised credentials) and modifies version records to alter audit trails or application history. **[CRITICAL NODE]**
│
└───[AND] Manipulate Application State via Version Tampering
    └───[OR] 4. Delete or Purge Version Records (Cover Tracks) **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
        └───[AND] 4.2 Direct Database Deletion of Version Records **[HIGH RISK PATH]**
            └───[LEAF] 4.2.1 Attacker gains direct database access and deletes version records to remove evidence of their actions or others. **[CRITICAL NODE]**

Attack Tree Path: Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data -> Lack of Granular Access Control on Version Attributes -> 1.4.1 PaperTrail configured to track sensitive attributes without implementing attribute-level access control, allowing unauthorized viewing of sensitive changes.

  • Attack Vector: The application uses PaperTrail to track changes to models, including attributes that contain sensitive information. However, it lacks attribute-level access control. This means that any user who can access version history (even if generally authorized to view some version data) can potentially view the sensitive attributes, even if they shouldn't have access to that specific data.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement attribute-level access control. This is crucial when versioning sensitive data. Explore solutions to selectively authorize access to specific attributes within version records.
    • Carefully choose which attributes to version. Re-evaluate if it's necessary to version highly sensitive data at all. If possible, avoid versioning it or use techniques to mask or redact sensitive information in version records.
    • Regularly review PaperTrail configuration. Ensure you understand which attributes are being tracked and if this aligns with your security and privacy requirements.

Attack Tree Path: Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data -> Exploit Data Leakage in Versioned Data -> Sensitive Data Stored in Versioned Attributes -> 2.1.1 Developers mistakenly include sensitive information (passwords, API keys, PII) in attributes tracked by PaperTrail.

  • Attack Vector: Developers, through oversight or lack of awareness, mistakenly configure PaperTrail to track attributes that contain highly sensitive information like passwords, API keys, Personally Identifiable Information (PII), or other confidential data. This sensitive data then becomes part of the version history, potentially accessible to unauthorized users if access controls are weak or bypassed.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Educate developers about data sensitivity and secure coding practices. Training should emphasize the risks of versioning sensitive data and how to avoid it.
    • Conduct code reviews specifically focused on PaperTrail configuration. Review model definitions and PaperTrail configurations to identify any accidental versioning of sensitive attributes.
    • Regularly audit versioned attributes. Implement automated or manual processes to periodically check which attributes are being tracked by PaperTrail and ensure no sensitive data is being inadvertently included.
    • Consider data masking or redaction. If versioning sensitive data is unavoidable, explore techniques to mask or redact sensitive information before it's stored in version records.

Attack Tree Path: Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data -> Exploit Data Leakage in Versioned Data -> Insecure Storage or Transmission of Version Data -> 2.2.1 Version data stored in plaintext in database without encryption.

  • Attack Vector: The database used to store application data, including PaperTrail's version records, is not configured to encrypt data at rest. This means that version data, which may contain sensitive information, is stored in plaintext on disk. If an attacker gains unauthorized access to the database files or backups (even without application access), they can easily read the sensitive version history.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Encrypt sensitive data at rest in the database. Implement database-level encryption or application-level encryption for sensitive attributes, including those stored in version records. This is a fundamental security control to protect data in case of database compromise.
    • Regularly review database security configurations. Ensure encryption is properly configured and enabled for all databases storing sensitive data, including version data.
    • Secure database backups. Database backups should also be encrypted to prevent data exposure if backups are compromised.

Attack Tree Path: Gain Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Historical Data -> Exploit Data Leakage in Versioned Data -> Long-Term Retention of Sensitive Data in Versions -> 2.3.1 Application retains versions indefinitely, increasing the window of opportunity for attackers to access historical sensitive data.

  • Attack Vector: The application retains version records indefinitely, or for an excessively long period, without a proper data retention policy. This means that sensitive historical data remains accessible for a longer time, increasing the window of opportunity for attackers to potentially access it through vulnerabilities or misconfigurations that may emerge in the future. It also increases the potential impact of a data breach if it occurs.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Implement a data retention policy for version records. Define a clear policy based on legal, regulatory, and business requirements for how long version data needs to be retained.
    • Regularly purge or archive older versions. Use PaperTrail's built-in purging mechanisms or develop custom scripts to automatically purge or archive version records that are older than the defined retention period.
    • Consider different retention policies for different types of data. You might need shorter retention periods for versions containing highly sensitive data compared to less sensitive data.
    • Document and communicate the data retention policy. Ensure all relevant teams understand and adhere to the policy.

Attack Tree Path: Manipulate Application State via Version Tampering -> Forge or Modify Version Records -> Direct Database Manipulation of Version Records -> 3.1.1 Attacker gains direct database access (e.g., via SQL injection or compromised credentials) and modifies version records to alter audit trails or application history.

  • Attack Vector: An attacker successfully gains direct access to the application's database. This could be through exploiting a SQL injection vulnerability in the application code, compromising database server credentials, or other means of unauthorized database access. Once they have direct database access, they can directly modify version records in the database tables. This allows them to forge new version records, modify existing ones, or delete records to manipulate the audit trail and potentially alter the perceived history of application state changes.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • Harden database security. This is paramount. Implement strong database access controls, use strong and regularly rotated database credentials, and restrict database access to only necessary application components.
    • Prevent SQL injection vulnerabilities. Employ secure coding practices, use parameterized queries or ORM features that prevent SQL injection, and conduct regular security code reviews and vulnerability scanning.
    • Implement database activity monitoring and auditing. Monitor database activity for suspicious or unauthorized actions, including modifications to version tables. Set up alerts for anomalies.
    • Consider database integrity checks. Implement mechanisms to periodically verify the integrity of version data to detect unauthorized modifications.

Attack Tree Path: Manipulate Application State via Version Tampering -> Delete or Purge Version Records (Cover Tracks) -> Direct Database Deletion of Version Records -> 4.2.1 Attacker gains direct database access and deletes version records to remove evidence of their actions or others.

  • Attack Vector: Similar to the previous point, an attacker gains direct access to the application's database. With this access, they can directly delete version records from the database tables. This allows them to remove evidence of their own malicious actions or the actions of others, effectively covering their tracks and undermining the auditability provided by PaperTrail.
  • Actionable Insights:
    • (Same as 3.1.1) Harden database security. Prevent unauthorized database access through strong access controls, secure credentials, and vulnerability prevention.
    • (Same as 3.1.1) Implement database activity monitoring and auditing. Monitor database activity for unauthorized deletions of version records. Set up alerts for suspicious deletion patterns.
    • Implement database backups and recovery procedures. Regular backups can help restore version history if it is maliciously deleted, although real-time detection and prevention are preferable.
    • Consider write-once, read-many (WORM) storage for audit logs. For highly sensitive audit trails, explore using WORM storage solutions that prevent deletion or modification of audit logs after they are written.