Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
283 lines (219 loc) · 14.8 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

283 lines (219 loc) · 14.8 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for quick/nimble

Mitigation Strategy: Dependency Pinning and Locking

Mitigation Strategy: Dependency Pinning and Locking

Description:

  • Step 1: Open the .nimble file in your Nim project root.
  • Step 2: In the requires section, specify exact or minimum versions for each dependency.
    • Exact version: requires "package == version" (e.g., requires "requests == 0.9.0")
    • Minimum version: requires "package >= version" (e.g., requires "requests >= 0.9.0")
  • Step 3: Run nimble lock in your project root. This generates nimble.lock file with resolved dependency versions.
  • Step 4: Commit both .nimble and nimble.lock to version control.
  • Step 5: Use nimble install for dependency installation to enforce versions from nimble.lock.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Dependency Confusion/Substitution (High Severity): Malicious packages with similar names could be installed if version ranges are too broad in .nimble. Pinning restricts acceptable versions.
  • Accidental Vulnerability Introduction (Medium Severity): Automatic dependency updates might introduce new vulnerabilities. Pinning prevents unexpected updates.
  • Build Reproducibility Issues (Low Severity - Security Impact): Inconsistent dependency versions across environments can lead to unpredictable behavior and environment-specific vulnerabilities. Locking ensures consistency.

Impact:

  • Dependency Confusion/Substitution: High Risk Reduction.
  • Accidental Vulnerability Introduction: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Build Reproducibility Issues: High Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Partially implemented. .nimble is used, but version constraints are often broad, and nimble.lock is not consistently used.

Missing Implementation:

  • Pinning specific versions in .nimble for most dependencies.
  • Generating and using nimble.lock.
  • Enforcing nimble install with lock file in CI/CD.

Mitigation Strategy: Regular Dependency Audits (Nimble Context)

Mitigation Strategy: Regular Dependency Audits

Description:

  • Step 1: Schedule regular audits (e.g., monthly) for Nimble dependencies.
  • Step 2: List Nimble dependencies using nimble list-deps and inspect nimble.lock (if used) for transitive dependencies.
  • Step 3: For each Nimble dependency, check for vulnerabilities:
    • Review dependency release notes and security advisories (linked from Nimble registry if available, or directly from package repository).
    • Search for CVEs for the dependency version.
    • Explore dependency scanning tools (general tools or future Nimble-specific tools).
  • Step 4: If vulnerabilities are found in Nimble dependencies:
    • Assess severity and exploitability in your application.
    • Prioritize patching.
    • Update to patched Nimble dependency version. Consider alternatives if no patch exists.
  • Step 5: Document audit process, findings, and remediation for Nimble dependencies.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Use of Vulnerable Dependencies (High Severity): Exploiting known vulnerabilities in Nimble packages.
  • Supply Chain Attacks (Medium Severity): Compromised Nimble dependencies could introduce malicious code. Audits help detect this.

Impact:

  • Use of Vulnerable Dependencies: High Risk Reduction.
  • Supply Chain Attacks: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Not implemented. No scheduled dependency audits for Nimble packages.

Missing Implementation:

  • Establishing a schedule for Nimble dependency audits.
  • Systematic process for vulnerability checking of Nimble packages.
  • Documentation of Nimble dependency audit findings.

Mitigation Strategy: Source Verification of Nimble Dependencies

Mitigation Strategy: Source Verification of Dependencies

Description:

  • Step 1: Primarily use the official Nimble package registry (https://nimble.directory/).
  • Step 2: When adding new Nimble dependencies, examine package information on the registry:
    • Check for typosquatting in package names.
    • Review package description, documentation, and source repository (linked from Nimble registry).
    • Assess maintainer reputation (Nimble registry might provide maintainer info).
  • Step 3: Be cautious with Nimble packages from unofficial sources:
    • Thoroughly vet unofficial sources and maintainers.
    • Carefully review code of packages from unofficial sources.
    • Consider private hosting/mirroring for better control.
  • Step 4: Utilize future Nimble checksum verification or package signing features when available.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Typosquatting (High Severity): Malicious Nimble packages with similar names.
  • Malicious Packages from Untrusted Sources (High Severity): Nimble packages from unknown sources containing malware.
  • Compromised Package Registry (Low to Medium Severity): Risk if the Nimble registry itself is compromised.

Impact:

  • Typosquatting: High Risk Reduction.
  • Malicious Packages from Untrusted Sources: High Risk Reduction.
  • Compromised Package Registry: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Partially implemented. Official Nimble registry is generally used, but formal source verification is lacking.

Missing Implementation:

  • Formal source verification process for Nimble dependencies.
  • Guidelines for evaluating Nimble package maintainers and sources.
  • Adopting future Nimble checksum/signature verification.

Mitigation Strategy: Minimal Nimble Dependency Principle

Mitigation Strategy: Minimal Dependency Principle

Description:

  • Step 1: When adding Nimble dependencies, evaluate necessity. Can functionality be implemented internally?
  • Step 2: Periodically review existing Nimble dependencies. Identify unused or minimally used packages.
  • Step 3: Remove unnecessary Nimble dependencies. Refactor code or implement alternatives.
  • Step 4: When choosing between Nimble packages, prefer those with smaller dependency footprint and narrower functionality.
  • Step 5: Monitor Nimble dependency tree using nimble list-deps. Analyze transitive dependencies for reduction opportunities.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Increased Attack Surface (Medium Severity): More Nimble dependencies increase potential vulnerability entry points.
  • Transitive Dependency Vulnerabilities (Medium Severity): Vulnerabilities in Nimble transitive dependencies.
  • Supply Chain Complexity (Low Severity - Security Management Overhead): Managing many Nimble dependencies becomes complex.

Impact:

  • Increased Attack Surface: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Transitive Dependency Vulnerabilities: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Supply Chain Complexity: Medium Risk Reduction (indirect).

Currently Implemented:

  • Partially implemented. Developers generally avoid unnecessary Nimble dependencies, but no formal process exists.

Missing Implementation:

  • Formalizing minimal Nimble dependency principle guideline.
  • Process for regular Nimble dependency review and reduction.
  • Integrating Nimble dependency footprint analysis in development workflow.

Mitigation Strategy: Private Nimble Repository/Mirror

Mitigation Strategy: Private Nimble Repository/Mirror

Description:

  • Step 1: Evaluate need for private Nimble repository/mirror for sensitive projects.
  • Step 2: Choose solution for private Nimble repository/mirror:
    • Dedicated Nimble registry server (if available).
    • Generic package manager adapted for Nimble.
    • Mirror of official Nimble registry.
  • Step 3: Configure projects to use private Nimble repository/mirror instead of public registry.
  • Step 4: Implement package management process for private repository:
    • Vetting and approving Nimble packages.
    • Syncing with official Nimble registry (if mirroring).
    • Access control for private Nimble repository.
  • Step 5: Educate developers on using private Nimble repository.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Supply Chain Attacks via Public Registry (Medium Severity): Reduces reliance on public Nimble registry.
  • Dependency Confusion/Substitution (Medium Severity): Greater control over Nimble packages in private repository.
  • Data Exfiltration via Dependency Requests (Low Severity - Confidentiality): Prevents dependency requests to public Nimble registry.

Impact:

  • Supply Chain Attacks via Public Registry: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Dependency Confusion/Substitution: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Data Exfiltration via Dependency Requests: Low Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Not implemented. Public Nimble registry is solely used.

Missing Implementation:

  • Decision on need for private Nimble repository/mirror.
  • Setup of private Nimble repository solution.
  • Configuration to use private Nimble repository.
  • Package vetting and management for private Nimble repository.

Mitigation Strategy: Keep Nimble Updated

Mitigation Strategy: Keep Nimble Updated

Description:

  • Step 1: Regularly check for Nimble updates (official website, release notes).
  • Step 2: Review release notes for security fixes in new Nimble versions.
  • Step 3: Update Nimble to latest stable version using recommended method (e.g., kochup).
  • Step 4: Test projects after Nimble update for compatibility.
  • Step 5: Include Nimble updates in system maintenance schedule.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Vulnerabilities in Nimble Tooling (Medium Severity): Vulnerabilities in Nimble itself.
  • Exploitation of Nimble Features (Low Severity): Exploiting weaknesses in Nimble functionality.

Impact:

  • Vulnerabilities in Nimble Tooling: High Risk Reduction.
  • Exploitation of Nimble Features: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Not consistently implemented. Updates are not regularly scheduled.

Missing Implementation:

  • Regular schedule for Nimble updates.
  • Including Nimble updates in system maintenance.

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Nimble Configuration

Mitigation Strategy: Secure Nimble Configuration

Description:

  • Step 1: Review Nimble configuration files (e.g., .config/nimble/nimble.ini).
  • Step 2: Avoid storing sensitive information in Nimble configuration files.
  • Step 3: For authentication to external services (private Nimble repositories), use secure credential management:
    • Environment Variables.
    • Secret Management Tools.
    • Nimble credential providers (if available in future).
  • Step 4: Restrict access to Nimble configuration files.
  • Step 5: Regularly audit Nimble configuration for security.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Exposure of Sensitive Credentials (High Severity): Storing credentials in Nimble configuration files.
  • Unauthorized Access to Nimble Configuration (Medium Severity): Modifying Nimble configuration to compromise builds.

Impact:

  • Exposure of Sensitive Credentials: High Risk Reduction.
  • Unauthorized Access to Nimble Configuration: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Partially implemented. No known sensitive credentials in Nimble config, but no formal policy.

Missing Implementation:

  • Formal policy against storing sensitive info in Nimble config.
  • Guidelines for secure credential management with Nimble.
  • Securing access to Nimble configuration files.

Mitigation Strategy: Review Nimble Build Scripts and Tasks

Mitigation Strategy: Review Nimble Build Scripts and Tasks

Description:

  • Step 1: Locate .nimble file and review task sections containing Nim code.
  • Step 2: Code review all Nim code in task sections.
  • Step 3: Understand actions of each build script/task. Ensure no unexpected commands.
  • Step 4: Pay attention to tasks with:
    • External command execution (exec, $).
    • File system operations.
    • Network operations.
  • Step 5: Ensure external commands are safe and necessary. Validate inputs to prevent command injection.
  • Step 6: Avoid hardcoding secrets in build scripts. Use environment variables or secret management.
  • Step 7: Regularly review Nimble build scripts during code reviews and when build needs change.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Malicious Code Injection via Build Scripts (High Severity): Harmful commands injected into .nimble tasks.
  • Command Injection Vulnerabilities in Build Scripts (Medium Severity): Unsanitized inputs in build scripts executing external commands.
  • Exposure of Sensitive Information in Build Scripts (Medium Severity): Hardcoding secrets in .nimble.

Impact:

  • Malicious Code Injection via Build Scripts: High Risk Reduction.
  • Command Injection Vulnerabilities in Build Scripts: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Exposure of Sensitive Information in Build Scripts: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Partially implemented. Code reviews occur, but specific focus on Nimble build script security is inconsistent.

Missing Implementation:

  • Formal security review of Nimble build scripts in code review process.
  • Guidelines for secure coding in Nimble build scripts.
  • Automated checks for security issues in Nimble build scripts (future tooling).

Mitigation Strategy: Checksum Verification (if available in Nimble ecosystem)

Mitigation Strategy: Checksum Verification (Future Feature)

Description:

  • Step 1: Monitor Nimble development for checksum verification/package signing features.
  • Step 2: If checksum verification is implemented, enable it in Nimble.
  • Step 3: Configure Nimble to automatically verify checksums of downloaded packages.
  • Step 4: If package signing is implemented, verify signatures.
  • Step 5: If checksum/signature verification fails, halt installation and investigate.
  • Step 6: Document use of checksum verification in security guidelines.

Threats Mitigated:

  • Package Tampering during Download (Medium Severity): Man-in-the-middle attacks modifying downloaded Nimble packages.
  • Compromised Package Registry (Low to Medium Severity): Tampered packages in the Nimble registry.

Impact:

  • Package Tampering during Download: Medium Risk Reduction.
  • Compromised Package Registry: Medium Risk Reduction.

Currently Implemented:

  • Not implemented. Checksum verification is not standard Nimble feature currently.

Missing Implementation:

  • Feature development of checksum verification in Nimble.
  • Adoption and configuration of checksum verification when available.
  • Integration into build and dependency management processes.