Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
191 lines (145 loc) · 19.3 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

191 lines (145 loc) · 19.3 KB

Deep Security Analysis of Pi-hole

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective:

The objective of this deep security analysis is to thoroughly examine the key components of the Pi-hole application, identify potential security vulnerabilities, assess their impact, and propose actionable mitigation strategies. The analysis will focus on the core functionalities of Pi-hole, including DNS resolution, blocklist management, web interface security, API security, and the optional DHCP server. We aim to provide specific, practical recommendations tailored to Pi-hole's architecture and design, rather than generic security advice.

Scope:

This analysis covers the following components of Pi-hole, as described in the provided Security Design Review:

  • FTLDNS (DNS Resolver): The core DNS functionality, including query processing, caching, and upstream communication.
  • Gravity (Blocklist Updater): The mechanism for downloading, parsing, and updating blocklists.
  • Web Interface: The user interface for configuration and monitoring.
  • API: The programmatic interface for interacting with Pi-hole.
  • Database: The storage for blocklists, whitelists, blacklists, and configuration.
  • DHCP Server (Optional): The integrated DHCP server functionality.
  • Build Process: The security of the build and release pipeline.
  • Deployment: The security considerations for the chosen Docker deployment model.

Methodology:

This analysis will employ the following methodology:

  1. Codebase and Documentation Review: We will infer the architecture, components, and data flow based on the provided design document, the Pi-hole GitHub repository (https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole), and available documentation.
  2. Threat Modeling: We will identify potential threats to each component based on its functionality and interactions with other components and external systems. We will consider common attack vectors, such as injection attacks, denial-of-service, man-in-the-middle attacks, and privilege escalation.
  3. Vulnerability Analysis: We will analyze the potential vulnerabilities associated with each identified threat, considering existing security controls and accepted risks.
  4. Impact Assessment: We will assess the potential impact of each vulnerability on the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the Pi-hole system and user data.
  5. Mitigation Recommendations: We will propose specific, actionable mitigation strategies to address the identified vulnerabilities and reduce the overall risk.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

2.1 FTLDNS (DNS Resolver)

  • Functionality: Receives DNS queries, checks against blocklists/whitelists/blacklists, forwards to upstream DNS servers, caches responses, implements DNSSEC and rate limiting.
  • Security Implications:
    • DNS Spoofing/Cache Poisoning: If DNSSEC is not properly configured or enforced, an attacker could inject malicious DNS records into the cache, redirecting users to malicious websites. FTLDNS's reliance on dnsmasq (as a fork) means it inherits any vulnerabilities present in the upstream project, although Pi-Hole's fork may have patched them. Regular updates are crucial.
    • Denial-of-Service (DoS): FTLDNS is susceptible to various DoS attacks, including amplification attacks and resource exhaustion. While rate limiting helps, it's not a complete solution. Careful tuning of rate limits is needed to balance security and usability. Specific configuration parameters related to connection limits and timeouts should be reviewed.
    • Information Disclosure: DNS queries can reveal sensitive information about user browsing habits. If query logging is enabled, this data must be protected. Even without logging, an attacker monitoring network traffic could potentially infer browsing patterns.
    • Upstream DNS Server Security: The security of Pi-hole depends on the security of the configured upstream DNS servers. If an upstream server is compromised, it could return malicious responses.
    • Reflection/Amplification Attacks: Pi-hole could be used in a DNS amplification attack if not configured correctly.

2.2 Gravity (Blocklist Updater)

  • Functionality: Downloads blocklists from configured sources, parses them, updates the database.
  • Security Implications:
    • Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: If blocklists are downloaded over HTTP (without HTTPS), an attacker could intercept the connection and inject malicious domains into the blocklist. This could lead to blocking legitimate websites or allowing malicious ones.
    • Compromised Blocklist Source: If a blocklist provider is compromised, they could distribute malicious blocklists containing incorrect or harmful entries.
    • Denial-of-Service (DoS): An attacker could provide a very large or malformed blocklist, causing Gravity to consume excessive resources or crash. Input validation and size limits are crucial.
    • Code Execution: Vulnerabilities in the parsing logic could potentially lead to arbitrary code execution if a crafted blocklist is processed.

2.3 Web Interface

  • Functionality: Provides a user interface for configuration and monitoring.
  • Security Implications:
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If user input is not properly sanitized, an attacker could inject malicious scripts into the web interface, potentially stealing cookies, session tokens, or redirecting users to phishing sites.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF): An attacker could trick a logged-in user into performing unintended actions on the web interface, such as changing settings or adding entries to the whitelist/blacklist.
    • Authentication Bypass: Weak password policies or vulnerabilities in the authentication mechanism could allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to the web interface.
    • Command Injection: If user-supplied data is used to construct shell commands without proper sanitization, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands on the Pi-hole server.
    • Information Disclosure: The web interface may expose sensitive information, such as configuration details or query logs, if not properly protected.

2.4 API

  • Functionality: Provides programmatic access to Pi-hole.
  • Security Implications:
    • Authentication Bypass: Weak or missing API key management could allow unauthorized access to the API.
    • Injection Attacks: Similar to the web interface, the API is susceptible to injection attacks if input is not properly validated.
    • Denial-of-Service (DoS): The API could be targeted by DoS attacks, overwhelming the Pi-hole server.
    • Unauthorized Access: If API keys are compromised, an attacker could gain full control over the Pi-hole instance.

2.5 Database

  • Functionality: Stores blocklists, whitelists, blacklists, and configuration data.
  • Security Implications:
    • SQL Injection: If database queries are constructed using unsanitized user input, an attacker could inject malicious SQL code, potentially reading, modifying, or deleting data.
    • Data Corruption: Errors in the database update process or vulnerabilities in the database software could lead to data corruption.
    • Unauthorized Access: If the database is not properly secured, an attacker could gain direct access to the data.

2.6 DHCP Server (Optional)

  • Functionality: Assigns IP addresses and network configuration to clients.
  • Security Implications:
    • DHCP Starvation: An attacker could exhaust the pool of available IP addresses, preventing legitimate clients from joining the network.
    • Rogue DHCP Server: An attacker could set up a rogue DHCP server on the network, providing incorrect network configuration to clients, potentially redirecting traffic or launching MitM attacks.
    • Information Disclosure: DHCP requests and responses can reveal information about connected devices.

2.7 Build Process

  • Security Implications:
    • Compromised Dependencies: If the build process uses compromised or outdated dependencies, the resulting Pi-hole installation could contain vulnerabilities.
    • Insufficient Code Review: Lack of thorough code review could allow malicious or buggy code to be introduced into the codebase.
    • Insecure Build Environment: If the build environment itself is compromised, an attacker could inject malicious code into the build artifacts.

2.8 Deployment (Docker Container)

  • Security Implications:
    • Outdated Base Image: Using an outdated or vulnerable base image for the Docker container could expose the Pi-hole installation to known vulnerabilities.
    • Excessive Privileges: Running the container with excessive privileges (e.g., as root) could increase the impact of a successful attack.
    • Insecure Container Configuration: Misconfigured container settings (e.g., exposed ports, insecure environment variables) could create security risks.
    • Docker Host Security: The security of the Docker host itself is crucial. A compromised host could compromise all running containers.

3. Mitigation Strategies

3.1 FTLDNS

  • Enforce DNSSEC Validation: Ensure DNSSEC is enabled and strictly enforced to prevent DNS spoofing. Regularly monitor DNSSEC validation status.
  • Tune Rate Limiting: Carefully configure rate limiting parameters to prevent DoS attacks while minimizing impact on legitimate users. Consider using different rate limits for different types of queries or clients. Monitor for excessive query rates.
  • Disable Query Logging (or Protect It): If query logging is not essential, disable it to protect user privacy. If logging is required, ensure the logs are stored securely, encrypted, and access is restricted. Implement a strict retention policy.
  • Choose Secure Upstream DNS Servers: Select reputable and secure upstream DNS servers that support DNSSEC and have strong security policies. Consider using multiple upstream servers for redundancy and resilience.
  • Regularly Update FTLDNS: Keep FTLDNS up-to-date to patch any vulnerabilities inherited from dnsmasq or discovered in Pi-hole's fork. Subscribe to security advisories.
  • Firewall Configuration: Configure the firewall on the Pi-hole host to only allow DNS traffic on port 53 (UDP and TCP) from trusted networks. Block all other incoming traffic.
  • Disable Recursion for Untrusted Networks: If Pi-hole is exposed to untrusted networks, disable recursion to prevent its use in reflection/amplification attacks.

3.2 Gravity

  • Use HTTPS for Blocklist Downloads: Ensure all blocklist sources use HTTPS to prevent MitM attacks. Reject any sources that do not support HTTPS.
  • Verify Blocklist Integrity: Implement checksum verification or digital signature validation for downloaded blocklists, if supported by the source. This helps ensure the blocklists have not been tampered with.
  • Implement Input Validation and Size Limits: Validate the format and size of downloaded blocklists to prevent DoS attacks and potential code execution vulnerabilities. Set reasonable limits on the size of blocklists.
  • Regularly Review Blocklist Sources: Periodically review the configured blocklist sources to ensure they are still reputable and trustworthy.
  • Sandboxing (Advanced): Consider running the blocklist parsing process in a sandboxed environment to limit the impact of potential vulnerabilities.

3.3 Web Interface

  • Implement Robust Input Validation: Use whitelist-based input validation for all user-supplied data to prevent XSS, command injection, and other injection attacks. Sanitize all output to the web interface.
  • Implement CSRF Protection: Use CSRF tokens to protect against CSRF attacks. Ensure all state-changing requests require a valid token.
  • Enforce Strong Password Policies: Require strong passwords for the web interface and consider implementing password complexity rules and account lockout policies.
  • Use HTTPS: Always use HTTPS to encrypt communication between the web interface and the user's browser. Obtain and install a valid TLS certificate.
  • Implement Two-Factor Authentication (2FA): Offer 2FA as an option to enhance authentication security.
  • Regularly Update Web Interface Components: Keep the web interface components (e.g., PHP, JavaScript libraries) up-to-date to patch any vulnerabilities.
  • Restrict Access: Limit access to the web interface to trusted networks or IP addresses using firewall rules or web server configuration.
  • Session Management: Use secure session management practices, including setting the HttpOnly and Secure flags on cookies.

3.4 API

  • Require API Keys: Implement strong API key authentication for all API requests. Generate unique, cryptographically random API keys.
  • Implement Rate Limiting: Apply rate limiting to API requests to prevent DoS attacks.
  • Implement Input Validation: Use whitelist-based input validation for all API parameters to prevent injection attacks.
  • Protect API Keys: Store API keys securely and do not expose them in client-side code or version control. Consider using environment variables or a secure configuration file.
  • Regularly Rotate API Keys: Implement a mechanism for regularly rotating API keys to limit the impact of compromised keys.
  • Audit API Usage: Log API requests and responses for auditing and security monitoring.

3.5 Database

  • Use Prepared Statements: Use prepared statements or parameterized queries for all database interactions to prevent SQL injection. Avoid constructing SQL queries using string concatenation.
  • Regularly Back Up the Database: Implement a regular backup schedule for the database to protect against data loss. Store backups securely.
  • Restrict Database Access: Limit access to the database to only the necessary users and processes. Use strong passwords for database accounts.
  • Monitor Database Activity: Monitor database logs for suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access attempts or unusual queries.
  • Encrypt Sensitive Data: If storing sensitive data in the database (e.g., API keys), encrypt it using strong encryption algorithms.

3.6 DHCP Server (Optional)

  • Limit DHCP Lease Range: Configure the DHCP server to use a limited lease range to mitigate DHCP starvation attacks.
  • Enable DHCP Snooping (if supported by network hardware): DHCP snooping can help prevent rogue DHCP servers on the network.
  • Monitor DHCP Leases: Regularly monitor DHCP leases to detect any unauthorized devices.
  • Use a Separate Network Segment (if possible): Consider placing the Pi-hole and its DHCP server on a separate network segment to isolate it from other devices.

3.7 Build Process

  • Use a Dependency Management System: Use a package manager (e.g., apt, pip) to manage dependencies and ensure they are up-to-date. Regularly scan dependencies for known vulnerabilities.
  • Implement Static Code Analysis: Use static code analysis tools (linters, security scanners) to identify potential vulnerabilities in the codebase.
  • Conduct Regular Code Reviews: Require code reviews for all changes before they are merged into the main branch.
  • Secure the Build Environment: Ensure the build environment is secure and protected from unauthorized access. Use a dedicated build server or container.
  • Sign Releases: Digitally sign releases to ensure their integrity and authenticity.

3.8 Deployment (Docker Container)

  • Use a Minimal Base Image: Use a minimal and up-to-date base image for the Docker container (e.g., Alpine Linux). Avoid using images with unnecessary software or services.
  • Run the Container as a Non-Root User: Create a dedicated user within the container and run the Pi-hole process as that user. Avoid running the container as root.
  • Limit Container Capabilities: Use Docker's capabilities mechanism to limit the privileges of the container. Only grant the necessary capabilities.
  • Use Read-Only Filesystems: Mount as many parts of the container's filesystem as read-only as possible to prevent attackers from modifying files.
  • Regularly Update the Docker Host and Engine: Keep the Docker host operating system and Docker Engine up-to-date to patch any vulnerabilities.
  • Use a Firewall: Configure a firewall on the Docker host to restrict network access to the container.
  • Monitor Container Activity: Monitor container logs and resource usage for suspicious activity.
  • Network Segmentation: Place the Docker host on a dedicated network segment, isolated from other critical systems. Use a reverse proxy with TLS termination in front of the Pi-hole web interface if exposing it externally.
  • Volumes: Carefully consider which host directories are mounted as volumes inside the container. Minimize the number of mounted volumes and ensure they have appropriate permissions.

4. Addressing Questions and Assumptions

  • Compliance Requirements (GDPR, CCPA): Pi-hole's primary function does not directly process personal data in a way that triggers GDPR or CCPA compliance if query logging is disabled. However, if query logging is enabled, the logs could be considered personal data, and compliance requirements would apply. This includes providing users with access to their data, allowing them to request deletion, and ensuring data security. The mitigation strategy of disabling query logging or implementing strong security and retention policies for logs directly addresses this concern.
  • Expected Scale of Deployment: The security recommendations are generally applicable to both small and large deployments. However, larger deployments may require more careful tuning of rate limiting and resource allocation.
  • Upstream DNS Servers: The security of the upstream DNS servers is critical. The mitigation strategy of choosing reputable and secure providers is essential. Users should be informed about the security policies of their chosen providers.
  • Logging Level and Retention Policies: The level of logging should be configurable, with the default being minimal or no logging. If logging is enabled, a clear retention policy must be defined and enforced. Users should be informed about the logging practices.
  • Vulnerability Handling Process: A clear process for handling security vulnerabilities is essential. This should include:
    • A designated security contact or email address for reporting vulnerabilities.
    • A process for triaging and verifying reported vulnerabilities.
    • A timeline for developing and releasing patches.
    • A mechanism for notifying users about security updates (e.g., through a mailing list, blog posts, or in-app notifications).
    • Consider a bug bounty program.

The assumptions made in the Security Design Review are generally reasonable. The focus on home and small business users, the responsibility of users for their own network security, and the preference for Docker deployment are all valid. The mitigation strategies provided in this analysis aim to enhance Pi-hole's security posture within these assumptions.