Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
262 lines (229 loc) · 20.1 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

262 lines (229 loc) · 20.1 KB

Okay, here's the deep security analysis based on the provided security design review of the Neon project:

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

  • Objective: To conduct a thorough security analysis of the key components of the Neon database system (as described in the provided design review), identifying potential vulnerabilities, assessing their impact, and recommending mitigation strategies. The analysis will focus on the architectural design, data flow, and inferred security controls. The primary goal is to identify weaknesses that could lead to data breaches, service disruptions, or unauthorized access.

  • Scope: The analysis will cover the following key components identified in the design review:

    • Proxy (Connection Pooling)
    • Compute Node (PostgreSQL)
    • Pageserver (Storage Management)
    • Control Plane (Management API)
    • Inter-component communication
    • Data storage (S3)
    • Authentication and Authorization mechanisms (JWT, RBAC, Auth0)
    • Build and Deployment processes (CI/CD, Kubernetes)

    The analysis will not cover:

    • Physical security of AWS data centers.
    • Security of the underlying operating systems (unless a specific vulnerability is directly relevant to Neon).
    • Detailed code-level analysis (beyond what can be inferred from the design and documentation).
    • Third-party service vulnerabilities (e.g., Auth0, AWS services) except where Neon's usage of those services introduces a risk.

  • Methodology:

    1. Component Decomposition: Analyze each component's role, responsibilities, and interactions with other components.
    2. Threat Modeling: Identify potential threats to each component based on its function and exposure. This will use a combination of STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) and attack trees.
    3. Vulnerability Analysis: Assess the likelihood and impact of each identified threat, considering existing security controls.
    4. Mitigation Recommendations: Propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies to address the identified vulnerabilities. These recommendations will be tailored to the Neon architecture and technology stack.
    5. Prioritization: Classify recommendations based on their criticality (High, Medium, Low).

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Let's break down the security implications of each component, applying the STRIDE threat model:

  • Proxy (Connection Pooling)

    • Role: Handles incoming client connections, performs connection pooling, and routes requests to Compute Nodes.
    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: An attacker could attempt to impersonate a legitimate client or a Compute Node.
      • Tampering: An attacker could modify requests in transit between the client and the Compute Node.
      • Repudiation: Lack of sufficient logging could make it difficult to trace malicious activity back to a specific client or connection.
      • Information Disclosure: Vulnerabilities in the proxy could expose connection details, internal IP addresses, or other sensitive information.
      • Denial of Service (DoS): The proxy is a prime target for DoS attacks, as it's the entry point for all client connections. Connection exhaustion, slowloris attacks, and other resource exhaustion attacks are possible.
      • Elevation of Privilege: A vulnerability in the proxy could allow an attacker to gain control of the proxy itself, potentially leading to access to other components.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Improper TLS configuration (weak ciphers, expired certificates).
      • Vulnerabilities in the connection pooling logic (resource leaks, race conditions).
      • Insufficient input validation (leading to potential injection attacks).
      • Lack of rate limiting or other DoS protection mechanisms.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce strong TLS configuration: Use only strong ciphers and protocols (TLS 1.3). Automate certificate management and renewal.
      • Implement robust DoS protection: Use a combination of techniques, including rate limiting, connection limits, and potentially a Web Application Firewall (WAF).
      • Thorough input validation: Validate all incoming data to prevent injection attacks.
      • Implement comprehensive logging: Log all connection attempts, errors, and security-relevant events.
      • Regular security audits and penetration testing: Focus on the proxy as a critical entry point.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Implement intrusion detection/prevention system (IDS/IPS): Monitor network traffic for malicious activity.

  • Compute Node (PostgreSQL)

    • Role: Runs a PostgreSQL instance, executes SQL queries, and interacts with the Pageserver.
    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: An attacker could attempt to connect directly to a Compute Node, bypassing the Proxy.
      • Tampering: An attacker could modify data in transit between the Compute Node and the Pageserver.
      • Repudiation: Lack of auditing within the PostgreSQL instance could make it difficult to track malicious queries or data modifications.
      • Information Disclosure: SQL injection vulnerabilities, configuration errors, or other vulnerabilities could expose sensitive data.
      • Denial of Service (DoS): Resource-intensive queries or other attacks could overwhelm the Compute Node, making it unavailable.
      • Elevation of Privilege: A vulnerability in PostgreSQL or a misconfiguration could allow an attacker to gain elevated privileges within the database or the operating system.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • SQL injection vulnerabilities in user applications or stored procedures.
      • PostgreSQL misconfiguration (weak authentication, excessive privileges).
      • Unpatched PostgreSQL vulnerabilities.
      • Insufficient resource limits (allowing a single user to consume all resources).
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce strong authentication and authorization: Use strong passwords, multi-factor authentication (if supported by the client libraries), and the principle of least privilege.
      • Prevent SQL injection: Use parameterized queries or prepared statements exclusively. Implement robust input validation and output encoding. Regularly scan for SQL injection vulnerabilities using SAST and DAST tools.
      • Harden PostgreSQL configuration: Follow security best practices for PostgreSQL configuration, including disabling unnecessary features, restricting network access, and enabling auditing.
      • Implement resource limits: Use PostgreSQL's resource limiting features (e.g., work_mem, max_connections) to prevent resource exhaustion.
      • Regularly update PostgreSQL: Apply security patches promptly.
      • Network Segmentation: Isolate compute nodes on a private network, accessible only through the proxy and control plane.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Enable PostgreSQL auditing: Log all SQL queries and data modifications.
      • Implement a database activity monitoring (DAM) solution: Monitor database activity for suspicious patterns.

  • Pageserver (Storage Management)

    • Role: Manages persistent storage of data, interacting with S3.
    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: An attacker could attempt to impersonate a Compute Node or the Control Plane to gain access to data.
      • Tampering: An attacker could modify data stored in S3 or in transit between the Pageserver and S3.
      • Repudiation: Lack of sufficient logging could make it difficult to track unauthorized access or modifications to data.
      • Information Disclosure: Vulnerabilities in the Pageserver or misconfigured S3 permissions could expose data.
      • Denial of Service (DoS): Attacks on the Pageserver or S3 could make data unavailable.
      • Elevation of Privilege: A vulnerability in the Pageserver could allow an attacker to gain control of the component, potentially leading to access to S3.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Improperly configured S3 bucket permissions (allowing public access).
      • Vulnerabilities in the Pageserver's data handling logic (leading to data corruption or leakage).
      • Insufficient authentication and authorization between the Pageserver and S3.
      • Lack of encryption at rest for data stored in S3.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce least privilege access to S3: Use IAM roles and policies to grant the Pageserver only the necessary permissions to access S3. Regularly review and audit these permissions.
      • Enable S3 server-side encryption: Ensure that all data stored in S3 is encrypted at rest using AES-256 or a stronger algorithm.
      • Implement strong authentication and authorization: Use IAM roles and secure communication channels between the Pageserver and S3.
      • Implement comprehensive logging: Log all access attempts, data modifications, and errors.
      • Regular security audits and penetration testing: Focus on the Pageserver's interaction with S3.
      • Network Segmentation: Isolate pageservers on a private network, accessible only by authorized compute nodes and the control plane.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Enable S3 versioning: This allows for recovery from accidental deletion or modification of data.
      • Enable S3 object lock: Prevent objects from being deleted or overwritten for a specified period.

  • Control Plane (Management API)

    • Role: Manages the overall system, including scaling, resource allocation, and user management.
    • Threats:
      • Spoofing: An attacker could attempt to impersonate an administrator or another internal service.
      • Tampering: An attacker could modify requests to the Control Plane to alter system configuration or create unauthorized resources.
      • Repudiation: Lack of sufficient audit logging could make it difficult to track malicious actions performed through the Control Plane.
      • Information Disclosure: Vulnerabilities in the Control Plane could expose sensitive information about the system's configuration or users.
      • Denial of Service (DoS): Attacks on the Control Plane could disrupt the entire system.
      • Elevation of Privilege: A vulnerability in the Control Plane could allow an attacker to gain full control of the system. This is the highest risk component.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Weak authentication or authorization mechanisms.
      • Insufficient input validation (leading to potential injection attacks).
      • Vulnerabilities in the API endpoints.
      • Lack of rate limiting or other DoS protection mechanisms.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce strong authentication and authorization: Use multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all administrative access. Implement strict RBAC policies to limit access based on the principle of least privilege.
      • Thorough input validation: Validate all input to the API to prevent injection attacks.
      • Implement comprehensive audit logging: Log all API requests, authentication attempts, and configuration changes.
      • Implement rate limiting and other DoS protection mechanisms: Protect the Control Plane from being overwhelmed by malicious requests.
      • Regular security audits and penetration testing: Focus on the Control Plane as the most critical component.
      • Network Segmentation: Isolate the control plane on a private network with highly restricted access.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Implement a Web Application Firewall (WAF): Protect the Control Plane's API endpoints from common web attacks.
      • Implement a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system: Monitor security logs for suspicious activity.

  • Inter-component Communication

    • Threats:
      • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: An attacker could intercept and modify communication between components.
      • Replay Attacks: An attacker could capture and replay legitimate requests.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Lack of mutual TLS authentication between components.
      • Use of weak encryption protocols or ciphers.
      • Insufficient validation of certificates.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce mutual TLS (mTLS) authentication: Require all components to authenticate each other using client certificates.
      • Use strong encryption protocols and ciphers: Use TLS 1.3 with strong ciphers.
      • Implement proper certificate validation: Ensure that certificates are valid and trusted.
      • Use a service mesh (e.g., Istio, Linkerd): A service mesh can simplify the implementation of mTLS and other security features for inter-service communication.

  • Data Storage (S3) - (Covered in Pageserver section)

  • Authentication and Authorization (JWT, RBAC, Auth0)

    • Threats:
      • Credential Stuffing: Attackers use stolen credentials from other breaches to try to gain access.
      • Brute-Force Attacks: Attackers try to guess passwords.
      • JWT Vulnerabilities: Weak signing keys, algorithm confusion attacks, or other vulnerabilities in the JWT implementation.
      • RBAC Misconfiguration: Excessive privileges granted to users or roles.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Weak password policies.
      • Lack of MFA.
      • Improperly configured JWT validation.
      • Insecure storage of JWT secrets.
      • Overly permissive RBAC roles.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Enforce strong password policies: Require long, complex passwords.
      • Enforce MFA for all administrative access and, ideally, for all user access.
      • Use strong JWT signing keys: Use long, randomly generated keys.
      • Securely store JWT secrets: Use a secrets management solution (e.g., AWS Secrets Manager, HashiCorp Vault).
      • Implement proper JWT validation: Validate the signature, expiration time, and other claims.
      • Regularly review and audit RBAC policies: Ensure that users and roles have only the necessary privileges.
      • Use short-lived JWTs: Minimize the window of opportunity for an attacker to use a stolen token.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Implement account lockout policies: Lock accounts after a certain number of failed login attempts.
      • Monitor for suspicious login activity: Alert on unusual login patterns.

  • Build and Deployment (CI/CD, Kubernetes)

    • Threats:
      • Compromised Build Pipeline: An attacker could inject malicious code into the build process.
      • Vulnerable Dependencies: The application could be vulnerable due to known vulnerabilities in its dependencies.
      • Misconfigured Kubernetes Cluster: Weaknesses in the Kubernetes configuration could expose the application.
    • Vulnerabilities:
      • Lack of code signing.
      • Outdated or vulnerable dependencies.
      • Weak Kubernetes RBAC policies.
      • Exposed Kubernetes API server.
    • Mitigation Strategies (High Priority):
      • Implement a secure build pipeline: Use a trusted CI/CD system. Sign all code artifacts. Scan for vulnerabilities in dependencies.
      • Regularly update dependencies: Use a dependency management tool (e.g., cargo) to keep dependencies up to date.
      • Harden Kubernetes configuration: Follow security best practices for Kubernetes, including using RBAC, network policies, and pod security policies.
      • Regularly scan Kubernetes clusters for vulnerabilities: Use a vulnerability scanner specifically designed for Kubernetes.
      • Implement SAST and DAST in the CI/CD pipeline.
    • Mitigation Strategies (Medium Priority):
      • Implement infrastructure as code (IaC): Use tools like Terraform to manage the Kubernetes cluster configuration in a consistent and auditable way.

3. Actionable Mitigation Strategies (Prioritized)

This section summarizes the most critical mitigation strategies from above, categorized by priority:

High Priority (Implement Immediately):

  1. Proxy:
    • Enforce strong TLS configuration (TLS 1.3, strong ciphers).
    • Implement robust DoS protection (rate limiting, connection limits, WAF).
    • Thorough input validation.
    • Comprehensive logging.
  2. Compute Node:
    • Enforce strong authentication and authorization (strong passwords, MFA).
    • Prevent SQL injection (parameterized queries/prepared statements exclusively).
    • Harden PostgreSQL configuration.
    • Implement resource limits.
    • Regularly update PostgreSQL.
    • Network Segmentation.
  3. Pageserver:
    • Enforce least privilege access to S3 (IAM roles and policies).
    • Enable S3 server-side encryption (AES-256).
    • Implement strong authentication and authorization with S3.
    • Comprehensive logging.
    • Network Segmentation.
  4. Control Plane:
    • Enforce strong authentication and authorization (MFA, strict RBAC).
    • Thorough input validation.
    • Comprehensive audit logging.
    • Implement rate limiting and other DoS protection mechanisms.
    • Network Segmentation.
  5. Inter-component Communication:
    • Enforce mutual TLS (mTLS) authentication.
    • Use strong encryption protocols and ciphers (TLS 1.3).
  6. Authentication and Authorization:
    • Enforce strong password policies.
    • Enforce MFA for all administrative access (and ideally all users).
    • Use strong JWT signing keys and securely store them.
    • Implement proper JWT validation.
    • Regularly review and audit RBAC policies.
    • Use short-lived JWTs.
  7. Build and Deployment:
    • Implement a secure build pipeline (code signing, vulnerability scanning).
    • Regularly update dependencies.
    • Harden Kubernetes configuration (RBAC, network policies, pod security policies).
    • Implement SAST and DAST in the CI/CD pipeline.

Medium Priority (Implement Soon):

  1. Proxy: Intrusion detection/prevention system (IDS/IPS).
  2. Compute Node: Enable PostgreSQL auditing, Database Activity Monitoring (DAM).
  3. Pageserver: Enable S3 versioning and object lock.
  4. Control Plane: Web Application Firewall (WAF), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM).
  5. Authentication and Authorization: Account lockout policies, monitor for suspicious login activity.
  6. Build and Deployment: Implement infrastructure as code (IaC).

Low Priority (Consider for Future Implementation):

These are generally good security practices, but may be less critical for Neon given its architecture and threat model:

  • Formal threat modeling and regular updates.
  • Advanced anomaly detection systems.

4. Conclusion

The Neon project, as described, has a good foundation for security, leveraging Rust, cloud-native technologies, and established security practices. However, there are several critical areas that require immediate attention to mitigate potential risks. The highest priority vulnerabilities are related to DoS attacks on the Proxy, SQL injection in the Compute Node, unauthorized access to S3 via the Pageserver, and compromise of the Control Plane. By implementing the recommended mitigation strategies, Neon can significantly improve its security posture and protect its users' data. Continuous security monitoring, regular audits, and a proactive approach to vulnerability management are essential for maintaining a secure system.