Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
129 lines (85 loc) · 144 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

129 lines (85 loc) · 144 KB

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

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the Pundit authorization library as it's intended to be used within a Ruby on Rails web application, identifying potential vulnerabilities, weaknesses, and areas for improvement in its design and implementation. The analysis will focus on how Pundit interacts with other components and how misconfigurations or incorrect usage could lead to security breaches. We will specifically analyze key components like Policy Files, authorize method, Policy Scopes, and helper methods.

  • Scope:

    • The analysis is limited to the Pundit library itself and its interaction with a standard Ruby on Rails application, as described in the design document.
    • We will consider the context of a mid-sized company with an established online presence, as outlined in the business posture.
    • We will assume the presence of existing security controls (authentication, secure coding practices, etc.) as described in the security posture.
    • We will not analyze the security of the underlying Rails framework, database, or external services, except where they directly interact with Pundit.
    • We will focus on authorization-specific vulnerabilities.
    • We will analyze the core components of Pundit as highlighted in its documentation: Policy Files, the authorize method, Policy Scopes, and helper methods (policy, policy_scope, etc.).

  • Methodology:

    1. Code Review and Documentation Analysis: We will examine the Pundit documentation and, conceptually, its source code (though we don't have direct access here) to understand its internal workings and identify potential security-relevant areas.
    2. Threat Modeling: We will identify potential threats related to authorization bypass, privilege escalation, and information disclosure, considering the business risks outlined in the design document.
    3. Component Interaction Analysis: We will analyze how Pundit interacts with Rails controllers, models, and views, focusing on data flow and potential points of failure.
    4. Best Practices Review: We will assess the design document's recommendations against established security best practices for authorization.
    5. Mitigation Strategy Recommendation: For each identified vulnerability or weakness, we will propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies tailored to Pundit and the Rails environment.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Let's break down the security implications of Pundit's key components:

  • 2.1 Policy Files (e.g., PostPolicy, UserPolicy)

    • Function: These Ruby classes encapsulate the authorization logic for a specific resource (model). Each method (e.g., show?, create?, update?, destroy?) returns a boolean indicating whether the current user is authorized to perform the corresponding action.

    • Security Implications:

      • Incorrect Logic: The most significant security risk with Pundit is incorrectly written policy logic. A developer might accidentally return true when they should return false, or vice versa, leading to unauthorized access. This is the primary "accepted risk" in the design document. Complex conditional logic increases the risk of errors.
      • Missing Methods: If a policy file doesn't define a method for a particular action, Pundit's default behavior is to deny access (which is secure by default). However, relying on this default behavior can be brittle. If a developer adds a new controller action but forgets to update the policy, it will be implicitly denied, potentially causing unexpected behavior. It's better to be explicit.
      • Overly Permissive Logic: Policies might be too broad, granting more permissions than necessary. This violates the principle of least privilege. For example, a policy might check only if a user is an admin, rather than checking for specific permissions related to the resource.
      • Data Leakage in Error Messages (Indirect): While Pundit itself doesn't generate error messages, if the application uses the results of policy checks to create custom error messages, it could inadvertently leak information about the authorization logic or the resource itself.
      • Implicit Trust in User Input: Policies often need to use attributes of the user and record objects. If these attributes are derived from user input without proper validation, it could lead to authorization bypasses. For example, if a policy checks user.role == 'admin' and the role attribute is set directly from a request parameter, an attacker could manipulate this parameter to gain admin privileges.

  • 2.2 The authorize Method

    • Function: This method is typically called in controller actions to enforce authorization. It takes a record (the resource being accessed) and an optional query (the action being performed, defaulting to the controller action name). It instantiates the appropriate policy, calls the corresponding method (e.g., show?), and raises a Pundit::NotAuthorizedError if the policy method returns false.

    • Security Implications:

      • Missing authorize Calls: The biggest risk here is simply forgetting to call authorize in a controller action. This would completely bypass authorization for that action. This is a common developer error.
      • Incorrect record Argument: Passing the wrong record to authorize could lead to incorrect authorization decisions. For example, authorizing the wrong instance of a model, or authorizing a class instead of an instance.
      • Incorrect query Argument: While less common, passing an incorrect query could also lead to incorrect authorization. This is more likely if developers use custom query names instead of relying on the default controller action name.
      • Exception Handling: The application needs to handle Pundit::NotAuthorizedError gracefully. The default behavior is to render a 403 Forbidden error, but the application might need to customize this behavior (e.g., redirect to a login page, display a user-friendly error message). Improper exception handling could lead to information disclosure or unexpected behavior.

  • 2.3 Policy Scopes

    • Function: Policy scopes are used to authorize access to collections of resources, typically in index actions. They define a resolve method that returns a scoped query (e.g., an ActiveRecord relation) representing the resources the user is allowed to see.

    • Security Implications:

      • Incorrect Scope Logic: Similar to policy methods, incorrect logic in the resolve method can lead to information disclosure (showing users resources they shouldn't see) or denial of service (not showing users resources they should see).
      • Performance Issues (Indirect Security Risk): Inefficient scope logic (e.g., N+1 queries) can lead to performance problems, potentially making the application vulnerable to denial-of-service attacks.
      • Unintended Data Exposure: If the scope logic is not carefully crafted, it might inadvertently include attributes or associations that should not be exposed to the user.

  • 2.4 Helper Methods (policy, policy_scope)

    • Function: These methods are used in views and controllers to access the appropriate policy or policy scope for a given record.

    • Security Implications:

      • Incorrect Usage in Views: While Pundit is primarily designed for controller-level authorization, it's possible to use policy and policy_scope in views to conditionally render content. This can be risky if not done carefully, as it can lead to information disclosure or inconsistent authorization. It's generally better to handle authorization in the controller and pass only the necessary data to the view.
      • Over-Reliance on View-Level Authorization: Using policy extensively in views can make the authorization logic harder to understand and maintain. It's better to centralize authorization in the controllers and policies.

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

Based on the documentation and common usage patterns, we can infer the following:

  • Architecture: Pundit follows a policy-based access control (PBAC) model. It's a library that integrates tightly with the Rails framework, providing a structured way to define and enforce authorization rules.

  • Components:

    • Controllers: Initiate authorization checks using the authorize method.
    • Policy Files: Contain the authorization logic for specific resources.
    • Policy Scopes: Define how to retrieve authorized collections of resources.
    • Models: Represent the resources being authorized.
    • User Object: Represents the currently authenticated user.
    • ApplicationRecord: The base class for all models in a Rails application.

  • Data Flow:

    1. A user makes a request to a Rails controller action.
    2. The controller action calls authorize with the relevant record and query.
    3. Pundit instantiates the appropriate policy file (e.g., PostPolicy) based on the record.
    4. Pundit calls the corresponding policy method (e.g., show?) on the policy instance, passing in the user and record.
    5. The policy method executes its logic, which may involve accessing attributes of the user and record, and returns true or false.
    6. If the policy method returns true, the controller action proceeds. If it returns false, Pundit raises a Pundit::NotAuthorizedError.
    7. The application handles the exception (or not, if it's a bug) and renders an appropriate response.
    8. For index actions, the controller uses policy_scope to retrieve a scoped collection of records, which are then passed to the view.

4. Specific Security Considerations (Tailored to Pundit)

  • 4.1. Over-reliance on Default Deny: While Pundit's default-deny behavior is secure, it's crucial to explicitly define policy methods for all relevant actions. Relying on the default can lead to unexpected behavior and make it harder to reason about the authorization logic.

  • 4.2. Implicit User Roles: Avoid hardcoding user roles (e.g., user.role == 'admin') directly in policy files. Instead, use a more flexible approach, such as a dedicated roles or permissions table, or a gem like rolify. This makes it easier to manage roles and permissions and reduces the risk of errors when roles change.

  • 4.3. Context-Dependent Authorization: Consider scenarios where authorization depends on more than just the user and the resource. For example, authorization might depend on the time of day, the user's location, or the state of a workflow. Pundit can handle this, but it requires careful design of the policy logic.

  • 4.4. Auditing: Pundit doesn't provide built-in auditing capabilities. It's essential to implement a separate auditing mechanism to track authorization decisions, especially failed attempts. This can help detect and investigate security incidents.

  • 4.5. Policy Testing: Thoroughly test all policy methods and scopes, including both positive and negative test cases. Use a testing framework like RSpec or Minitest to write automated tests. Consider using a code coverage tool to ensure that all branches of the policy logic are tested.

  • 4.6. Policy Review: Regularly review and update Pundit policies as the application evolves. This is especially important when new features are added or existing features are modified.

  • 4.7. Integration with Other Security Controls: Ensure that Pundit integrates correctly with other security controls, such as authentication, input validation, and output encoding.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Tailored to Pundit)

| Vulnerability / Weakness | Mitigation Strategy

Key Takeaways and Actionable Items

  1. Explicit Policy Definition: Ensure every controller action that requires authorization has a corresponding, explicitly defined policy method. Don't rely on Pundit's default-deny behavior. This is the single most important takeaway.

  2. Comprehensive Testing: Implement robust, automated tests for every policy method and scope, covering both positive and negative cases. Use a code coverage tool to ensure all logic branches are tested.

  3. Principle of Least Privilege: Policies should grant only the minimum necessary permissions. Avoid overly broad role-based checks.

  4. Input Validation: Never trust user-supplied data used within policies without thorough validation. This is a critical point where Pundit intersects with general secure coding practices.

  5. Careful View Usage: Minimize the use of Pundit helpers in views. Prefer controller-level authorization and pass only authorized data to the view.

  6. Auditing: Implement a separate auditing system to log authorization decisions, especially failures.

  7. Regular Reviews: Conduct regular code reviews with a specific focus on authorization logic.

  8. Consider Policy Linters: Explore using a policy linter or static analysis tool specifically designed for Pundit to catch common errors.

  9. Avoid Hardcoded Roles: Use a flexible role/permission management system instead of hardcoded strings within policies.

  10. Handle Exceptions: Ensure Pundit::NotAuthorizedError is handled correctly and consistently across the application, avoiding information leakage in error messages.

This deep analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the security considerations when using Pundit, going beyond the initial design review to offer concrete, actionable steps to improve the security posture of a Rails application leveraging this library. The focus is on preventing common pitfalls and ensuring that Pundit is used in a way that enhances, rather than undermines, the overall security of the system.