Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
70 lines (57 loc) · 9.17 KB

threat-modeling.md

File metadata and controls

70 lines (57 loc) · 9.17 KB

Threat Model Analysis for lemmynet/lemmy

Threat: Malicious Content Propagation via Federation (Exploiting Lemmy Vulnerabilities)

  • Threat: Malicious Content Propagation via Federation (Exploiting Lemmy Vulnerabilities)

    • Description: A malicious federated instance sends crafted ActivityPub messages (posts, comments, etc.) that exploit specific vulnerabilities in Lemmy's parsing or handling of federated content. This goes beyond general XSS and targets flaws in Lemmy's code itself. The attacker leverages federation to deliver the exploit.
    • Impact: Could lead to remote code execution (RCE) on the lemmy_server, data breaches, account compromise, or client-side exploitation of lemmy-ui users. The severity depends on the specific vulnerability exploited.
    • Affected Component:
      • lemmy_server: ActivityPub inbox processing (/inbox, /sharedInbox endpoints) – specifically, the code that deserializes and validates ActivityPub objects. Vulnerable parsing logic.
      • lemmy-ui: Frontend rendering components that handle potentially malicious content after it has passed server-side checks (e.g., a vulnerability in how Lemmy's frontend handles a specific, unusually formatted image URL).
      • Federation logic: The code responsible for handling incoming and outgoing ActivityPub messages, including validation and sanitization.
    • Risk Severity: Critical (if RCE is possible), High (otherwise)
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Rigorous Input Validation (ActivityPub): Implement extremely strict validation of all fields within incoming ActivityPub objects, going beyond basic type checking and enforcing strict length limits, character sets, and structural constraints. Assume all federated input is potentially malicious.
      • Fuzz Testing: Perform extensive fuzz testing of the ActivityPub parsing and handling code in lemmy_server to identify potential vulnerabilities.
      • Secure Deserialization: Use secure deserialization libraries and techniques to prevent object injection vulnerabilities.
      • Sandboxing (If Possible): Explore the possibility of sandboxing the processing of federated content to limit the impact of potential exploits.
      • Regular Security Audits (Federation Code): Focus security audits specifically on the code that handles federation, including ActivityPub parsing, validation, and processing.
      • Dependency Auditing: Regularly audit all dependencies used by Lemmy for known vulnerabilities, especially those related to parsing or networking.

Threat: Denial of Service (DoS) via Federation (Exploiting Lemmy Logic)

  • Threat: Denial of Service (DoS) via Federation (Exploiting Lemmy Logic)

    • Description: A malicious federated instance sends specifically crafted ActivityPub requests that, while technically valid according to the protocol, exploit weaknesses in Lemmy's internal logic to cause excessive resource consumption (CPU, memory, database). This is not a generic flood attack, but rather one that targets specific Lemmy code paths. For example, an attacker might send a specially crafted "follow" request that triggers an inefficient database query or a complex calculation within Lemmy.
    • Impact: The Lemmy instance becomes unresponsive, denying service to legitimate users. This impacts availability and can damage reputation.
    • Affected Component:
      • lemmy_server: ActivityPub inbox processing – specifically, the code that handles specific ActivityPub activity types (e.g., Follow, Create, Announce) and their associated logic. Vulnerable code paths within these handlers.
      • Database: Potentially inefficient database queries triggered by malicious requests.
      • Federation logic: The code responsible for handling incoming ActivityPub requests and dispatching them to the appropriate handlers.
    • Risk Severity: High
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Code Profiling: Use code profiling tools to identify performance bottlenecks and inefficient code paths within lemmy_server, particularly in the ActivityPub handling logic.
      • Database Query Optimization: Carefully review and optimize all database queries, especially those triggered by federated requests. Use database query analyzers to identify slow queries.
      • Resource Limits (Per Activity Type): Implement rate limiting or resource limits not just on the number of requests, but also on the type of ActivityPub activity (e.g., limit the rate of "follow" requests more strictly than "like" requests if "follow" is found to be more resource-intensive).
      • Algorithmic Complexity Analysis: Analyze the algorithmic complexity of the code that handles federated requests to identify potential vulnerabilities to algorithmic complexity attacks.
      • Stress Testing: Perform regular stress testing of the Lemmy instance with various types of (simulated) malicious ActivityPub requests to identify performance weaknesses.

Threat: Moderator Account Compromise (Exploiting Lemmy Authentication)

  • Threat: Moderator Account Compromise (Exploiting Lemmy Authentication)

    • Description: An attacker exploits a vulnerability in Lemmy's authentication or authorization logic to gain access to a moderator account. This is not a generic phishing or password guessing attack, but rather a flaw in Lemmy's code (e.g., a broken access control check, a session management vulnerability specific to Lemmy, or a flaw in the password reset functionality).
    • Impact: The attacker can manipulate community content, ban users, change settings, and potentially escalate privileges or compromise the entire instance.
    • Affected Component:
      • lemmy_server: User authentication and authorization logic (/login, /register, password reset functionality, session management) – specifically, any vulnerable code related to verifying user credentials, managing sessions, or enforcing access control.
    • Risk Severity: Critical
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Security Audits (Authentication): Conduct regular security audits of the authentication and authorization code in lemmy_server, focusing on potential vulnerabilities like broken access control, session management flaws, and injection attacks.
      • Secure Session Management (Lemmy-Specific): Ensure that Lemmy's session management implementation follows best practices and is free of vulnerabilities like session fixation, session prediction, and insufficient session expiration. This requires careful review of Lemmy's specific session handling code.
      • Input Validation (Authentication Endpoints): Implement rigorous input validation on all authentication-related endpoints (/login, /register, password reset) to prevent injection attacks.
      • Penetration Testing (Authentication): Perform regular penetration testing specifically targeting Lemmy's authentication and authorization mechanisms.

Threat: Exploitation of Lemmy-Specific Code Vulnerabilities (RCE/Data Breach)

  • Threat: Exploitation of Lemmy-Specific Code Vulnerabilities (RCE/Data Breach)

    • Description: An attacker discovers and exploits a critical vulnerability specific to the Lemmy codebase that allows for Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the server or a significant data breach (e.g., direct access to the database contents). This is a high-impact vulnerability unique to Lemmy's implementation.
    • Impact: Complete compromise of the Lemmy instance, potential access to sensitive user data, and the ability to use the server for malicious purposes.
    • Affected Component: Varies depending on the specific vulnerability. Could be any part of lemmy_server, potentially involving database interactions, API endpoints, or federation logic.
    • Risk Severity: Critical
    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Static Code Analysis: Use static code analysis tools to automatically scan the Lemmy codebase for potential vulnerabilities.
      • Dynamic Code Analysis: Use dynamic code analysis tools (e.g., fuzzers) to test the running application for vulnerabilities.
      • Security-Focused Code Reviews: Conduct code reviews with a strong emphasis on security, looking for potential vulnerabilities in all parts of the codebase.
      • Dependency Management: Keep all dependencies up-to-date and regularly audit them for known vulnerabilities.
      • Bug Bounty Program: Consider establishing a bug bounty program to incentivize security researchers to find and report vulnerabilities.
      • Prepared Incident Response Plan: Have a well-defined incident response plan in place to quickly respond to and mitigate the impact of a successful attack.