Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
55 lines (46 loc) · 7.24 KB

attack-surface.md

File metadata and controls

55 lines (46 loc) · 7.24 KB

Attack Surface Analysis for sidekiq/sidekiq

Attack Surface: Unsecured Redis Instance

  • Description: The Redis instance used by Sidekiq is accessible without proper authentication or network restrictions.
  • Sidekiq Contribution: Sidekiq relies on Redis as its data store. If Redis is unsecured, Sidekiq's data and operations become vulnerable. Sidekiq configuration directly points to the Redis instance, making it a critical dependency.
  • Example: An attacker scans the network, finds an open Redis port (default 6379), connects without a password, and uses KEYS * to list all keys, revealing job data and potentially sensitive information stored in Redis by Sidekiq. They could then use DEL to delete queues or SET to inject malicious job data.
  • Impact: Data breach, job manipulation, denial of service, potential for further system compromise if Redis is used for other application data.
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Enable Redis Authentication: Set a strong password using requirepass in the Redis configuration.
    • Network Isolation: Configure firewalls to restrict access to the Redis port (6379 by default) only from trusted sources (e.g., application servers, Sidekiq workers). Bind Redis to 127.0.0.1 or specific internal IPs.
    • Regular Security Audits: Periodically audit Redis configuration and access controls.
    • Use TLS/SSL for Redis Connections: Encrypt communication between Sidekiq and Redis, especially in networked environments.

Attack Surface: Unprotected Sidekiq Web UI

  • Description: The Sidekiq Web UI is exposed without authentication and authorization, allowing unauthorized access to monitoring and management features.
  • Sidekiq Contribution: Sidekiq provides a built-in Web UI for monitoring and managing jobs. By default, it might be accessible without authentication if not explicitly configured otherwise.
  • Example: An administrator forgets to configure authentication for the Sidekiq Web UI. An attacker discovers the UI URL, accesses it, views job queues, worker status, and application metrics, gaining insights into the application's internal workings. Depending on the UI version and configuration, they might be able to retry or discard jobs, causing disruption.
  • Impact: Information disclosure, potential job manipulation leading to disruption or data inconsistencies, CSRF vulnerabilities could allow actions on behalf of authenticated users if present.
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Implement Web UI Authentication: Use Rack middleware like Rack::Auth::Basic or integrate with your application's existing authentication system to protect the Sidekiq Web UI.
    • Restrict Access by IP: Configure web server or firewall rules to limit access to the Sidekiq Web UI to specific IP addresses or networks (e.g., internal admin network).
    • Disable Web UI in Production (If Not Needed): If the Web UI is not required in production environments, consider disabling it entirely to eliminate this attack surface.
    • Regularly Update Sidekiq: Keep Sidekiq updated to patch any potential vulnerabilities in the Web UI itself.

Attack Surface: Insecure Job Deserialization

  • Description: Job arguments, often serialized, are processed without proper validation, potentially leading to deserialization vulnerabilities or logic flaws.
  • Sidekiq Contribution: Sidekiq serializes job arguments to store them in Redis and deserializes them when workers process jobs. If this process handles untrusted data insecurely, it becomes an attack vector.
  • Example: A job takes user-provided data as an argument. This data is serialized (e.g., as JSON) and enqueued. A malicious user crafts a specially crafted JSON payload that, when deserialized by the worker, exploits a vulnerability in the JSON parsing library or triggers unexpected behavior in the job processing logic. In extreme cases, if Marshal.load were used (highly discouraged for untrusted data), it could lead to RCE.
  • Impact: Deserialization vulnerabilities can lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE), data corruption, or denial of service. Logic flaws can lead to unexpected application behavior and potential security breaches.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical (if RCE is possible)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Validate and Sanitize Job Arguments: Thoroughly validate and sanitize all job arguments before enqueuing jobs and within job handlers before processing.
    • Use Safe Serialization Formats: Prefer JSON or other safer serialization formats over formats like Marshal when dealing with potentially untrusted data. Avoid using Marshal.load on untrusted data entirely.
    • Input Validation in Job Handlers: Implement robust input validation and sanitization within the job processing code to handle deserialized data securely.
    • Security Audits of Deserialization Logic: Review code that handles deserialization for potential vulnerabilities and ensure secure practices are followed.

Attack Surface: Vulnerable Job Processing Code

  • Description: The application-specific code within Sidekiq jobs contains security vulnerabilities (e.g., SQL injection, command injection, insecure API calls).
  • Sidekiq Contribution: Sidekiq executes the job processing code. While Sidekiq itself is not the source of these vulnerabilities, it provides the execution context and exposes these vulnerabilities to potential exploitation through job arguments.
  • Example: A Sidekiq job takes a user ID as an argument and uses it in a raw SQL query without proper sanitization, leading to SQL injection. An attacker could craft a malicious user ID to inject SQL commands and potentially access or modify database data. Another example is command injection if job code constructs shell commands based on unsanitized job arguments.
  • Impact: Wide range of impacts depending on the vulnerability: data breach, data manipulation, privilege escalation, remote code execution, denial of service.
  • Risk Severity: High to Critical (depending on the vulnerability type and impact)
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Secure Coding Practices: Apply secure coding principles when writing job processing code, including input validation, output encoding, parameterized queries, avoiding command injection, and secure API interactions.
    • Regular Security Audits and Testing: Include job processing code in regular security audits and penetration testing to identify and remediate vulnerabilities.
    • Principle of Least Privilege: Ensure Sidekiq workers and the application have the minimum necessary privileges to perform their tasks, limiting the impact of potential compromises.
    • Code Reviews: Conduct thorough code reviews of job processing logic to identify potential security flaws.
    • Static and Dynamic Analysis Tools: Utilize static and dynamic analysis security tools to automatically detect vulnerabilities in job processing code.