Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
69 lines (54 loc) · 5.47 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

69 lines (54 loc) · 5.47 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for quick/nimble

Objective: Execute Arbitrary Code or Manipulate Test Results via Nimble

Attack Tree Visualization

Goal: Execute Arbitrary Code or Manipulate Test Results via Nimble

├── 1. Exploit Nimble Matcher Vulnerabilities [CRITICAL] │ ├── 1.1 Predicate Injection in Custom Matchers [HIGH RISK] │ │ └── 1.1.1 Craft malicious input that alters the logic of a custom predicate. │ └── 1.1.2 Exploit vulnerabilities in third-party libraries used within custom matchers. [HIGH RISK] └── 3. Exploit Nimble's Dependencies [CRITICAL] └── 3.1 Vulnerabilities in XCTest (or other underlying testing framework) [HIGH RISK] └── 3.1.1 Exploit known vulnerabilities in the underlying testing framework...

Attack Tree Path: 1. Exploit Nimble Matcher Vulnerabilities [CRITICAL]

  • Description: This is the core attack vector focusing on weaknesses within how Nimble matchers (especially custom ones) are implemented and used. It's critical because successful exploitation here often grants direct control over the testing environment.
    • Sub-Vectors:

Attack Tree Path: 1.1 Predicate Injection in Custom Matchers [HIGH RISK]

*   **1.1.1 Craft malicious input that alters the logic of a custom predicate:**
    *   **Description:** Attackers craft specific input data that, when processed by a custom matcher's predicate, changes the intended logic of the predicate. This is analogous to SQL injection, but within the context of the testing framework.
    *   **Likelihood:** Medium
    *   **Impact:** High (Potential for arbitrary code execution)
    *   **Effort:** Medium (Requires understanding the custom matcher's code)
    *   **Skill Level:** Intermediate to Advanced
    *   **Detection Difficulty:** Medium (Requires code review, fuzzing, or potentially dynamic analysis)
    *   **Mitigation:**
        *   Thoroughly validate and sanitize all inputs to custom matchers, especially those used in predicates.
        *   Use parameterized queries or equivalent techniques where applicable (if the predicate interacts with external systems).
        *   Perform code reviews focusing on input handling within custom matchers.
        *   Fuzz test custom matchers with a variety of inputs, including malicious ones.

Attack Tree Path: 1.1.2 Exploit vulnerabilities in third-party libraries used within custom matchers. [HIGH RISK]

*   **Description:** If a custom matcher uses a third-party library, and that library has a vulnerability, the attacker can exploit that vulnerability through the matcher.
    *   **Likelihood:** Low to Medium (Depends on the libraries used and their update status)
    *   **Impact:** High (Potential for arbitrary code execution, depending on the library vulnerability)
    *   **Effort:** Low to Medium (Exploiting a known vulnerability is easier than finding a zero-day)
    *   **Skill Level:** Intermediate
    *   **Detection Difficulty:** Medium to Hard (Requires vulnerability scanning and monitoring)
    *   **Mitigation:**
        *   Keep all dependencies up-to-date. Use automated dependency management tools.
        *   Audit third-party libraries used within custom matchers for known vulnerabilities.
        *   Consider sandboxing or isolating the execution of custom matchers if they rely on potentially risky libraries.
        *   Use a Software Composition Analysis (SCA) tool to identify vulnerable dependencies.

Attack Tree Path: 3. Exploit Nimble's Dependencies [CRITICAL]

  • Description: This attack vector targets vulnerabilities not in Nimble's code directly, but in the libraries it depends on. This is critical because these dependencies are often foundational and widely used, making vulnerabilities impactful.
    • Sub-Vectors:

Attack Tree Path: 3.1 Vulnerabilities in XCTest (or other underlying testing framework) [HIGH RISK]

    *   **3.1.1 Exploit known vulnerabilities in the underlying testing framework...**
        *   **Description:** Nimble relies on XCTest (or a similar framework). If XCTest has a vulnerability, it can be exploited through Nimble.
        *   **Likelihood:** Low (Assuming regular updates of XCTest)
        *   **Impact:** Very High (Potential for arbitrary code execution within the testing environment, potentially affecting the host system)
        *   **Effort:** Low to Medium (Exploiting a known vulnerability is easier)
        *   **Skill Level:** Intermediate to Advanced
        *   **Detection Difficulty:** Medium to Hard (Requires monitoring for security advisories and applying updates promptly)
        *   **Mitigation:**
            *   Keep XCTest (or the relevant testing framework) up-to-date.  This is the *primary* mitigation.
            *   Monitor for security advisories related to the testing framework.
            *   Consider using a containerized or virtualized testing environment to limit the impact of a successful exploit.