Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
182 lines (158 loc) · 8.84 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

182 lines (158 loc) · 8.84 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for pistondevelopers/piston

Objective: To achieve arbitrary code execution (ACE) on the server or client running a Piston-based application, or to cause a denial-of-service (DoS) specific to Piston's functionality.

Attack Tree Visualization

Compromise Piston-based Application (ACE or DoS)
    |
    +--- Exploit Piston Core
    |       |
    |       +--- Input Handling
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows (unsafe/FFI)
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [CRITICAL] Integer Overflows (unsafe/FFI)
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [CRITICAL] Deserialization Issues
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- Logic Errors
    |       |
    |       +--- Graphics Handling
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows (unsafe/FFI)
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [DoS] Resource Exhaustion
    |       |       |
    |       |       +--- [CRITICAL] Vulnerabilities in Underlying Graphics Libraries
    |       |
    |       +--- Event Handling
    |               |
    |               +--- [DoS] Event Starvation
    |
    |       +--- Window Handling
    |               |
    |               +--- [DoS] Resource Exhaustion
    |               |
    |               +--- [CRITICAL] Vulnerabilities in Underlying Windowing System
    |
    +--- Exploit Piston Libraries
            |
            +--- Image Handling
            |       |
            |       +--- [CRITICAL] Image Bombs [DoS]
            |       |
            |       +--- [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows
            |
            +--- Audio Handling
                    |
                    +--- [CRITICAL] Malformed Audio Files

Attack Tree Path: 1. Input Handling Vulnerabilities (High-Risk Path)

  • [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows (unsafe/FFI):

    • Description: Exploiting memory corruption vulnerabilities in unsafe Rust code or through Foreign Function Interface (FFI) calls to C libraries. The attacker crafts malicious input that overwrites memory beyond allocated buffers.
    • Likelihood: Low
    • Impact: High (ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Rigorous code review of unsafe blocks and FFI calls. Extensive fuzz testing with malformed input. Use of memory-safe alternatives where possible.

  • [CRITICAL] Integer Overflows/Underflows (unsafe/FFI):

    • Description: Similar to buffer overflows, but exploiting integer arithmetic errors in unsafe code or FFI calls. The attacker provides input that causes calculations to wrap around, leading to unexpected memory access.
    • Likelihood: Low
    • Impact: Medium to High (Memory corruption, potentially ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Careful review of integer arithmetic in unsafe code and FFI calls. Use of checked arithmetic operations. Fuzz testing.

  • [CRITICAL] Deserialization Issues:

    • Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities in how the application deserializes data (e.g., from network input or configuration files). If a vulnerable deserialization library is used, the attacker can craft malicious serialized data that, when deserialized, executes arbitrary code.
    • Likelihood: Low to Medium
    • Impact: High (ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Use a secure deserialization library. Avoid deserializing untrusted data. Implement strict input validation before deserialization.

  • Logic Errors: * Description: Exploiting flaws in how input events are processed, leading to incorrect state or unintended actions. * Likelihood: Medium * Impact: Low to Medium * Effort: Low to Medium * Skill Level: Intermediate * Detection Difficulty: Medium * Mitigation: Thorough code review, unit and integration testing.

Attack Tree Path: 2. Graphics Handling Vulnerabilities

  • [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows (unsafe/FFI):

    • Description: Similar to input handling, but occurring within the graphics processing pipeline, potentially during texture loading or shader execution.
    • Likelihood: Low
    • Impact: High (ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Same as input handling buffer overflows.

  • [DoS] Resource Exhaustion:

    • Description: The attacker submits a large number of draw calls, allocates excessive textures, or otherwise consumes graphics resources to cause a denial-of-service.
    • Likelihood: Medium
    • Impact: Medium (DoS)
    • Effort: Low
    • Skill Level: Novice to Intermediate
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy
    • Mitigation: Implement resource limits (e.g., maximum texture size, number of draw calls).

  • [CRITICAL] Vulnerabilities in Underlying Graphics Libraries:

    • Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities in the underlying graphics APIs (OpenGL, Vulkan, etc.) used by Piston.
    • Likelihood: Very Low
    • Impact: High to Very High (System compromise)
    • Effort: Very High
    • Skill Level: Expert
    • Detection Difficulty: Very Hard
    • Mitigation: Keep graphics drivers and libraries up-to-date.

Attack Tree Path: 3. Event Handling Vulnerabilities

  • [DoS] Event Starvation:
    • Description: Flooding the event queue with high-priority events to prevent other events from being processed.
    • Likelihood: Medium
    • Impact: Medium (DoS)
    • Effort: Low
    • Skill Level: Novice to Intermediate
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy
    • Mitigation: Implement rate limiting on event sources.

Attack Tree Path: 4. Window Handling Vulnerabilities

  • [DoS] Resource Exhaustion:

    • Description: Creating a large number of windows or manipulating window properties to cause resource exhaustion.
    • Likelihood: Medium
    • Impact: Medium (DoS)
    • Effort: Low
    • Skill Level: Novice to Intermediate
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy
    • Mitigation: Limit the number of windows that can be created.

  • [CRITICAL] Vulnerabilities in Underlying Windowing System:

    • Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities in the underlying windowing system (GLFW, SDL, etc.).
    • Likelihood: Low
    • Impact: High to Very High (System compromise)
    • Effort: Very High
    • Skill Level: Expert
    • Detection Difficulty: Very Hard
    • Mitigation: Keep windowing system libraries up-to-date.

Attack Tree Path: 5. Image Handling Vulnerabilities (Piston Libraries)

  • [CRITICAL] Image Bombs [DoS]:

    • Description: Using specially crafted image files (e.g., highly compressed images that expand to enormous sizes) to consume excessive memory or CPU resources during decoding.
    • Likelihood: Medium
    • Impact: Medium (DoS)
    • Effort: Low
    • Skill Level: Novice to Intermediate
    • Detection Difficulty: Easy to Medium
    • Mitigation: Implement limits on image dimensions and file sizes. Use a secure image library.

  • [CRITICAL] Buffer Overflows:

    • Description: Exploiting buffer overflows in the image decoding library.
    • Likelihood: Low
    • Impact: High (ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Use a well-vetted and actively maintained image library. Fuzz test the image loading routines.

Attack Tree Path: 6. Audio Handling Vulnerabilities (Piston Libraries)

  • [CRITICAL] Malformed Audio Files:
    • Description: Similar to image bombs, but using malformed audio files to trigger vulnerabilities (including buffer overflows) in the audio decoding library.
    • Likelihood: Low to Medium
    • Impact: High (Potential for ACE)
    • Effort: Medium to High
    • Skill Level: Advanced
    • Detection Difficulty: Medium to Hard
    • Mitigation: Use a well-vetted and actively maintained audio library. Fuzz test the audio loading routines.