Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
134 lines (105 loc) · 14.5 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

134 lines (105 loc) · 14.5 KB

Deep Analysis of Shopify Liquid Security

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the Shopify Liquid template engine, focusing on its key components, identifying potential vulnerabilities, and providing actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will consider the engine's design, implementation, and deployment context within the Shopify platform. We aim to identify risks related to RCE, DoS, data leakage, XSS, and supply chain attacks, as outlined in the provided security design review.

Scope: This analysis focuses on the Liquid template engine itself (version available on GitHub: https://github.com/shopify/liquid) and its core components as described in the C4 diagrams and security design review. It considers the primary deployment context within Shopify's Ruby on Rails environment. It does not cover the security of the entire Shopify platform, individual Shopify stores, or third-party applications, except where they directly interact with the Liquid engine. The analysis also considers custom filters and tags as a potential attack surface.

Methodology:

  1. Code Review: We will examine the Liquid codebase on GitHub, focusing on areas identified as security-critical in the design review (Parser, Renderer, Context, Filters, Tags, File System access). We will look for common coding patterns that could lead to vulnerabilities.
  2. Documentation Review: We will analyze the official Liquid documentation to understand intended security mechanisms and limitations.
  3. Design Review Analysis: We will leverage the provided security design review, including the C4 diagrams, to understand the architecture, data flow, and security controls.
  4. Threat Modeling: Based on the above, we will identify potential threats and attack vectors, considering the business risks outlined in the design review.
  5. Vulnerability Inference: We will infer potential vulnerabilities based on the code, documentation, and threat modeling.
  6. Mitigation Recommendation: For each identified vulnerability, we will propose specific and actionable mitigation strategies.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

We'll analyze each component from the C4 Container diagram, focusing on security implications:

  • Parser:

    • Function: Lexes and parses Liquid template code into an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST).
    • Security Implications:
      • RCE: Vulnerabilities in the parser (e.g., buffer overflows, type confusion, insecure deserialization) could allow a malicious template to execute arbitrary code during parsing. This is the highest risk area. Liquid's parser uses a combination of regular expressions and manual parsing logic. Complex regular expressions can be a source of ReDoS (Regular Expression Denial of Service) vulnerabilities.
      • DoS: A maliciously crafted template could cause the parser to consume excessive resources (CPU, memory), leading to a denial of service. This could involve deeply nested structures, extremely long strings, or exploiting parser inefficiencies.
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Fuzzing: Extensive fuzz testing of the parser with various malformed inputs is crucial to identify edge cases and vulnerabilities. This should be part of Shopify's internal CI/CD.
        • Secure Parsing Techniques: Use of a robust parsing library (if possible) or careful manual parsing with strict input validation and length limits. Avoid complex, potentially vulnerable regular expressions.
        • Memory Limits: Enforce strict memory limits during parsing to prevent excessive memory allocation.
        • Timeouts: Implement timeouts for parsing operations to prevent them from running indefinitely.
        • Regular Expression Optimization/Review: Carefully review and optimize all regular expressions used in the parser to mitigate ReDoS vulnerabilities. Consider using a ReDoS checker.

  • Renderer:

    • Function: Traverses the AST, evaluates expressions, and generates the final output.
    • Security Implications:
      • RCE: While the parser is the primary target for RCE, vulnerabilities in the renderer (e.g., how it handles filters and tags) could also lead to code execution.
      • DoS: A complex template with many loops, expensive filters, or large data sets could cause the renderer to consume excessive resources.
      • Data Leakage: If the renderer doesn't properly handle sensitive data from the context, it could be exposed in the output.
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Resource Limits: Enforce strict limits on rendering time, memory usage, and the number of iterations in loops. Liquid already has some of these, but they should be reviewed and potentially tightened.
        • Sandboxing: Consider using a sandboxing technique to further isolate the rendering process and limit its access to system resources. This might be challenging in Ruby, but exploring options like chroot or containerization could be beneficial.
        • Output Encoding: Ensure that all output is properly encoded to prevent XSS. Liquid's automatic escaping should be thoroughly tested and verified.
        • Context Isolation: Carefully control the data exposed to the renderer through the context. Avoid passing unnecessary or sensitive data.

  • Context:

    • Function: Provides the data (variables, objects) accessible to the template.
    • Security Implications:
      • Data Leakage: If the context contains sensitive data (e.g., API keys, internal configuration), it could be leaked if the template is not carefully designed or if there's a vulnerability in the renderer.
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Principle of Least Privilege: Only expose the minimum necessary data to the context. Avoid passing entire objects if only a few fields are needed.
        • Data Sanitization: Sanitize all data passed to the context to remove any potentially harmful characters or code.
        • Clear Separation of Concerns: The application using Liquid is responsible for populating the context securely. Liquid itself should not be responsible for fetching sensitive data.

  • File System (Limited Access):

    • Function: Allows loading template partials (includes).
    • Security Implications:
      • Path Traversal: A malicious template could attempt to access files outside the intended template directory using path traversal techniques (e.g., ../).
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Strict Path Validation: Implement rigorous path validation to ensure that only files within the allowed template directory can be accessed. Reject any paths containing .. or absolute paths.
        • Whitelisting: Use a whitelist of allowed file extensions (e.g., .liquid) to prevent loading of potentially harmful files.
        • Chroot/Jail: Consider using chroot or a similar mechanism to further restrict file system access.

  • Filters:

    • Function: Modify data values (e.g., formatting, escaping).
    • Security Implications:
      • XSS: Custom filters that don't properly escape output could introduce XSS vulnerabilities.
      • RCE: A poorly implemented custom filter could potentially execute arbitrary code if it uses eval or similar functions on untrusted input.
      • Data Leakage: A custom filter could inadvertently expose sensitive data if it's not designed carefully.
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Secure Coding Guidelines: Provide clear and comprehensive guidelines for developers on how to write secure custom filters. Emphasize the importance of input validation and output encoding.
        • Code Review: Require code review for all custom filters before they are deployed.
        • Input Validation: Custom filters should validate their input to ensure it's of the expected type and format.
        • Output Encoding: Custom filters must properly encode their output to prevent XSS. Use Liquid's built-in escaping functions whenever possible.
        • Avoid eval: Strongly discourage the use of eval or similar functions in custom filters.

  • Tags:

    • Function: Control template logic (loops, conditionals, etc.).
    • Security Implications:
      • RCE: Similar to filters, custom tags could introduce RCE vulnerabilities if they execute arbitrary code based on untrusted input.
      • DoS: Custom tags could be used to create infinite loops or consume excessive resources.
      • Mitigation Strategies:
        • Secure Coding Guidelines: Provide clear guidelines for developers on writing secure custom tags.
        • Code Review: Require code review for all custom tags.
        • Input Validation: Custom tags should validate their input.
        • Avoid eval: Strongly discourage the use of eval or similar functions.
        • Resource Limits: Consider how custom tags might interact with resource limits and ensure they are properly accounted for.

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

Based on the codebase and documentation, we can infer the following:

  1. Input: The primary input is the Liquid template code itself, provided as a string. Secondary inputs are the data provided in the Context and any files loaded via include.
  2. Parsing: The Parser uses a combination of regular expressions and manual parsing to create an AST. The AST represents the structure of the template.
  3. Rendering: The Renderer walks the AST, evaluating expressions and executing tags. It accesses data from the Context and applies filters as needed.
  4. Output: The Renderer generates the final output string, which is typically HTML, but could be other text-based formats.
  5. Filters and Tags: These are invoked by the Renderer during the rendering process. Built-in filters and tags are part of the Liquid library. Custom filters and tags are Ruby code that extends Liquid's functionality.
  6. File System Access: Limited file system access is provided for loading template partials (includes). This access is restricted to a specific directory.

4. Tailored Security Considerations

Given that Liquid is a template engine used primarily for rendering web content, the following security considerations are paramount:

  • Preventing RCE is the absolute highest priority. Any RCE vulnerability in Liquid would have catastrophic consequences for Shopify and its merchants.
  • DoS protection is critical. A malicious template could easily bring down a storefront, impacting sales and reputation.
  • Data leakage must be prevented. While Liquid itself doesn't handle authentication or authorization, it must ensure that sensitive data passed to it is not exposed.
  • XSS prevention is essential. Although Liquid aims to prevent XSS through automatic escaping, custom filters and tags introduce a potential attack surface.
  • Supply chain security is important. Liquid relies on RubyGems, and vulnerabilities in dependencies could be exploited.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Tailored to Liquid)

In addition to the mitigation strategies listed for each component above, here are some overarching recommendations:

  • Comprehensive Fuzzing: Implement a continuous fuzzing program for the Liquid parser and renderer. This should be integrated into Shopify's internal CI/CD pipeline. Use a variety of fuzzing tools and techniques to maximize coverage.
  • Regular Expression Auditing: Regularly audit all regular expressions used in the Liquid codebase, particularly in the parser. Use a ReDoS checker to identify potentially vulnerable expressions.
  • Strict Resource Limits: Review and tighten the existing resource limits in Liquid (rendering time, memory usage, loop iterations). Consider adding new limits if necessary. Make these limits configurable by the application using Liquid.
  • Custom Filter/Tag Sandboxing: Explore options for sandboxing custom filters and tags. This could involve running them in a separate process or using a restricted Ruby environment. This is a challenging but potentially high-impact mitigation.
  • Dependency Management: Maintain a rigorous dependency management process. Use tools like Dependabot to automatically identify and update vulnerable dependencies.
  • Security Training: Provide regular security training for Shopify engineers working on Liquid, focusing on secure coding practices for template engines.
  • Penetration Testing: Conduct regular penetration testing of Liquid, specifically targeting the attack vectors identified in this analysis.
  • Static Analysis Improvements: Investigate and integrate more advanced static analysis tools that can specifically detect logic flaws and security vulnerabilities beyond basic code style issues.
  • Dynamic Analysis (DAST): As recommended in the initial review, implement a DAST program to test live instances of Liquid, which can catch vulnerabilities that static analysis might miss.
  • Content Security Policy (CSP) Enforcement: While Liquid handles output encoding, enforcing a strict CSP at the application level (Shopify platform) provides a crucial second layer of defense against XSS. This is particularly important for mitigating risks from custom filters or unforeseen vulnerabilities.
  • Vulnerability Disclosure Program: Maintain a clear and responsive vulnerability disclosure program to encourage responsible reporting of security issues by external researchers.
  • Review of Accepted Risks: Regularly review the "Accepted Risks" in the security posture. Specifically, focus on "Complex Template Logic" and "Custom Filters/Tags" to find ways to reduce the inherent risks. This might involve providing more secure APIs or sandboxing capabilities.
  • Monitoring and Alerting: Implement robust monitoring and alerting for unusual Liquid behavior, such as excessive resource consumption or errors during parsing/rendering. This can help detect and respond to attacks in real-time.

This deep analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the security considerations for Shopify Liquid. By implementing these mitigation strategies, Shopify can significantly reduce the risk of vulnerabilities and ensure the continued security and reliability of its platform.