Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
50 lines (41 loc) · 6.02 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

50 lines (41 loc) · 6.02 KB

Threat Model Analysis for gleam-lang/gleam

Threat: BEAM VM Remote Code Execution

  • Description: An attacker exploits a vulnerability in the BEAM VM (Erlang VM), the runtime environment for Gleam applications, to execute arbitrary code on the server. This could be achieved through network attacks targeting the VM or by exploiting memory corruption issues within the VM itself.
  • Impact: Critical. Full compromise of the server hosting the Gleam application, leading to complete system control, data breaches, service disruption, and potential malware installation.
  • Gleam Component Affected: BEAM VM (Runtime Environment for Gleam)
  • Risk Severity: Critical
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Ensure Erlang/OTP and the BEAM VM are consistently updated to the latest versions with all security patches applied.
    • Implement robust network security measures, such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems, to limit exposure of the BEAM VM to untrusted networks.
    • Adhere to BEAM security best practices for deployment and configuration, including running with least privilege.
    • Proactively monitor Erlang/OTP security advisories and mailing lists for reported VM vulnerabilities and apply updates promptly.

Threat: Malicious Gleam Compiler Bug Exploitation

  • Description: An attacker leverages a bug or vulnerability within the Gleam compiler itself to inject malicious code into the Erlang bytecode generated during the compilation process. This could involve crafting specific Gleam source code that triggers the compiler bug, resulting in the inclusion of backdoors or exploits within the compiled application without the developer's explicit knowledge.
  • Impact: High. Compromised integrity of the application's compiled code, potentially leading to backdoors, data manipulation, unauthorized access, or denial of service depending on the nature of the injected malicious code.
  • Gleam Component Affected: Gleam Compiler
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Utilize stable and well-tested versions of the Gleam compiler for production deployments.
    • Actively monitor the Gleam project's issue trackers and security advisories for reports of compiler bugs and security-related fixes.
    • Consider employing static analysis tools (if available for Gleam or Erlang bytecode) to detect potential anomalies or injected code within the compiled output.
    • Promptly report any suspected compiler bugs or security vulnerabilities to the Gleam development team for investigation and remediation.

Threat: Dependency Confusion Attack via hex.pm

  • Description: An attacker uploads a malicious package to hex.pm, the package registry for Gleam and Erlang/Elixir, using a name that is similar or identical to a legitimate internal or private dependency intended for use within the Gleam application. If the application's dependency resolution process is susceptible, it might inadvertently download and incorporate the attacker's malicious package instead of the intended legitimate dependency.
  • Impact: High. Introduction of malicious code directly into the Gleam application through a compromised dependency, potentially enabling data breaches, backdoors, or other forms of compromise.
  • Gleam Component Affected: Gleam Package Management (hex.pm, rebar3)
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Prioritize the use of private package registries or internal mirrors for managing private or internal dependencies to minimize reliance on public registries like hex.pm for sensitive components.
    • Carefully scrutinize package names and authors when adding new dependencies to Gleam projects, verifying their legitimacy and trustworthiness.
    • Implement robust dependency management practices within rebar3 configurations to explicitly define trusted package sources and potentially utilize checksum verification mechanisms if available.
    • Actively monitor hex.pm and the Gleam community for any reports of suspicious packages or potential dependency confusion attempts, and report any suspicious findings.

Threat: Data Injection at Gleam/Erlang/Elixir Interoperability Boundary

  • Description: An attacker injects malicious data when the Gleam application interacts with external Erlang or Elixir code. If the data exchanged between Gleam and Erlang/Elixir components is not rigorously validated and sanitized at the interoperability boundary, an attacker could manipulate this data to exploit vulnerabilities within the Erlang/Elixir code or vice versa. This could lead to issues like command injection if unsanitized data is passed to an Erlang function executing system commands.
  • Impact: High. Potential for remote code execution, data breaches, or significant logic errors if injected data is processed in a vulnerable manner by the interacting Erlang or Elixir code. The severity depends on the specific vulnerabilities exposed in the Erlang/Elixir components and the nature of the injected data.
  • Gleam Component Affected: Gleam/Erlang/Elixir Interoperability Layer
  • Risk Severity: High
  • Mitigation Strategies:
    • Clearly define and rigorously enforce security boundaries at all points where Gleam code interoperates with Erlang or Elixir code.
    • Implement comprehensive input validation and sanitization for all data transmitted between Gleam and Erlang/Elixir components, treating all external data as potentially untrusted.
    • Utilize type checking and data validation mechanisms at the interoperability boundary to ensure data integrity and adherence to expected formats.
    • Conduct thorough security testing specifically focused on interoperability points to identify and mitigate potential injection vulnerabilities or data handling issues.