Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
270 lines (211 loc) · 29 KB

sec-design-deep-analysis.md

File metadata and controls

270 lines (211 loc) · 29 KB

Deep Security Analysis of Cartography

1. Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Objective:

This deep security analysis aims to identify and evaluate potential security vulnerabilities and risks associated with the Cartography application, based on its design, architecture, and intended functionality as outlined in the provided security design review. The analysis will focus on understanding the security implications of Cartography's key components, data flow, and deployment model to provide actionable and tailored mitigation strategies. The ultimate objective is to enhance Cartography's security posture and minimize potential risks to organizations deploying and utilizing this tool.

Scope:

The scope of this analysis encompasses the following aspects of Cartography, as described in the security design review:

  • Business Posture: Business priorities, goals, and risks related to Cartography's use.
  • Security Posture: Existing and recommended security controls, security requirements.
  • Design (C4 Model): Context, Container, Deployment, and Build diagrams and their descriptions.
  • Risk Assessment: Data sensitivity and critical business processes supported by Cartography.
  • Questions & Assumptions: Addressing key questions and validating assumptions to ensure accurate analysis.

This analysis will specifically focus on the security aspects of Cartography itself and its immediate dependencies. It will not extend to a comprehensive security audit of the underlying cloud providers or the organization's entire infrastructure, but will consider the interactions and dependencies on these elements.

Methodology:

This analysis will employ a risk-based approach, utilizing the following methodology:

  1. Decomposition and Understanding: Thoroughly analyze the provided security design review document, including diagrams and descriptions, to understand Cartography's architecture, components, data flow, and intended security controls.
  2. Threat Modeling: For each key component and data flow path, identify potential threats and vulnerabilities based on common attack vectors and security best practices (e.g., OWASP Top Ten, STRIDE). This will involve considering:
    • Confidentiality: Risks to sensitive cloud inventory data.
    • Integrity: Risks to the accuracy and completeness of collected data.
    • Availability: Risks to the operational stability of Cartography.
    • Authentication and Authorization: Weaknesses in access control mechanisms.
    • Input Validation: Vulnerabilities related to data ingestion from cloud providers and user inputs.
    • Cryptography: Adequacy of encryption for data at rest and in transit.
    • Dependency Management: Risks associated with third-party libraries.
    • Build and Deployment Security: Vulnerabilities introduced during the software development lifecycle.
  3. Security Control Evaluation: Assess the effectiveness of existing and recommended security controls in mitigating identified threats. Identify gaps and areas for improvement.
  4. Risk Assessment and Prioritization: Evaluate the likelihood and impact of identified risks based on the data sensitivity and business criticality of Cartography. Prioritize risks for mitigation.
  5. Mitigation Strategy Development: Develop specific, actionable, and tailored mitigation strategies for each identified risk, considering Cartography's architecture, open-source nature, and cloud deployment context. These strategies will focus on practical recommendations that can be implemented by the development and operations teams.
  6. Documentation and Reporting: Document the analysis process, findings, identified risks, and recommended mitigation strategies in a clear and structured report.

2. Security Implications of Key Components

Based on the C4 Container Diagram, Cartography's key components are: Web UI, API Server, Graph Database, Data Collection Service, and Task Queue. Let's analyze the security implications of each:

2.1. Web UI

  • Security Implications:

    • Authentication and Authorization Bypass: Weak or missing authentication mechanisms could allow unauthorized users to access the Web UI and view sensitive cloud inventory data. Inadequate authorization could lead to users accessing data or functionalities beyond their intended permissions.
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): If user inputs or data from the Graph Database are not properly sanitized and encoded before being displayed in the Web UI, attackers could inject malicious scripts that execute in users' browsers, potentially leading to session hijacking, data theft, or defacement.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF): Without CSRF protection, attackers could trick authenticated users into performing unintended actions on the Web UI, such as triggering data collection or modifying settings.
    • Insecure Session Management: Weak session management (e.g., predictable session IDs, long session timeouts without inactivity checks) could allow attackers to hijack user sessions.
    • Information Disclosure: Error messages or verbose logging in the Web UI could inadvertently expose sensitive information.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in front-end JavaScript libraries or frameworks used by the Web UI could be exploited.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Web UI:

    • The Web UI likely displays sensitive cloud inventory data. Compromise could lead to significant information disclosure.
    • User roles and permissions are crucial to control access to different parts of the cloud inventory data.

2.2. API Server

  • Security Implications:

    • Authentication and Authorization Bypass: Similar to the Web UI, weak or missing authentication and authorization on the API Server could allow unauthorized access to Cartography's functionalities and data. This is especially critical as the API is also used by Security/Compliance Tools.
    • Injection Attacks (SQL Injection, NoSQL Injection, Command Injection): If the API Server does not properly validate and sanitize inputs from the Web UI or Security Tools before querying the Graph Database or executing commands, it could be vulnerable to injection attacks. Graph databases like Neo4j can be susceptible to Cypher injection if queries are dynamically constructed from user inputs.
    • API Abuse (Rate Limiting, Denial of Service): Lack of rate limiting and request throttling could allow attackers to overload the API Server, leading to denial of service.
    • Data Exposure: API endpoints might inadvertently expose more data than intended, especially if not carefully designed with proper output filtering and pagination.
    • Insecure Communication (Lack of HTTPS): If HTTPS is not enforced for API communication, sensitive data transmitted between the Web UI, Security Tools, and the API Server could be intercepted.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in backend frameworks or libraries used by the API Server could be exploited.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography API Server:

    • The API Server acts as the central point of access to Cartography's data and functionalities. Its compromise would have a wide-ranging impact.
    • API security is crucial for integrations with Security/Compliance Tools, as these tools might rely on Cartography data for critical security operations.

2.3. Graph Database

  • Security Implications:

    • Unauthorized Access: If access control to the Graph Database is not properly configured, unauthorized users or components could directly access and manipulate the database, leading to data breaches or data integrity issues.
    • Data Breach (Data at Rest): If sensitive cloud inventory data is not encrypted at rest in the Graph Database, a physical breach or compromise of the database storage could lead to data exposure.
    • Data Integrity Issues: Unauthorized modifications or deletions of data in the Graph Database could lead to inaccurate or incomplete cloud inventory information, impacting security analysis and compliance auditing.
    • Denial of Service: Resource exhaustion or database misconfigurations could lead to denial of service for Cartography.
    • Injection Attacks (Cypher Injection): If the API Server constructs Cypher queries dynamically without proper sanitization, the Graph Database could be vulnerable to Cypher injection attacks.
    • Backup Security: Insecure backups of the Graph Database could become a target for attackers.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Graph Database:

    • The Graph Database stores the core cloud inventory data, making it a highly sensitive component.
    • Data integrity is paramount for Cartography to provide accurate and reliable security posture information.
    • Performance and scalability of the Graph Database are important for handling large cloud environments.

2.4. Data Collection Service

  • Security Implications:

    • Credential Compromise: The Data Collection Service stores and uses cloud provider credentials (API keys, IAM roles). If these credentials are not securely managed, stored, and rotated, they could be compromised, allowing attackers to gain unauthorized access to cloud provider environments.
    • API Key Exposure (Logging, Errors): Accidental logging or exposure of cloud provider API keys in error messages or logs could lead to credential compromise.
    • Input Validation Vulnerabilities (from Cloud Provider APIs): While Cartography collects data, it still needs to validate the structure and type of data received from cloud provider APIs to prevent unexpected behavior or processing errors. Maliciously crafted API responses from compromised cloud provider accounts could potentially be used to exploit vulnerabilities in the Data Collection Service.
    • Data Integrity Issues (Data Tampering in Transit): Although less likely with HTTPS, if communication with cloud provider APIs is not properly secured, there's a theoretical risk of data tampering in transit.
    • Rate Limiting and API Abuse (Cloud Provider APIs): Improper handling of API rate limits or aggressive data collection could lead to denial of service or throttling by cloud providers.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in libraries used for interacting with cloud provider APIs could be exploited.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Data Collection Service:

    • This component directly interacts with cloud provider APIs and handles sensitive credentials, making it a high-risk component.
    • Secure credential management is absolutely critical.
    • The service needs to be resilient to API errors and rate limits from cloud providers.

2.5. Task Queue

  • Security Implications:

    • Unauthorized Access: If access control to the Task Queue is not properly configured, unauthorized components or attackers could inject, modify, or delete tasks, potentially disrupting data collection or manipulating Cartography's behavior.
    • Message Tampering: If messages in the Task Queue are not integrity-protected, attackers could potentially tamper with task parameters, leading to unintended actions by the Data Collection Service.
    • Denial of Service: Flooding the Task Queue with malicious tasks or exploiting vulnerabilities in the queue service could lead to denial of service.
    • Information Disclosure (Message Content): If sensitive information is included in task messages (though ideally avoided), insecure access to the Task Queue could lead to information disclosure.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Task Queue:

    • The Task Queue is a critical component for reliable data collection. Its availability and integrity are important for Cartography's functionality.
    • Access control is needed to prevent unauthorized manipulation of data collection tasks.

2.6. Deployment Components (AWS ECS, Load Balancer, Managed Services)

  • Security Implications:

    • IAM Role Misconfiguration (ECS Tasks): Overly permissive IAM roles assigned to ECS tasks could grant excessive privileges to Cartography components, increasing the impact of a compromise.
    • Network Security Group Misconfiguration: Incorrectly configured Network Security Groups could expose Cartography components to unauthorized network access.
    • Container Image Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in base images or dependencies within container images could be exploited.
    • Load Balancer Misconfiguration: Insecure Load Balancer configurations (e.g., weak SSL/TLS settings, open ports) could expose Cartography to attacks.
    • Managed Service Security (Graph Database, Task Queue): Reliance on managed services shifts some security responsibility to the cloud provider, but it's crucial to properly configure and secure these services according to best practices (e.g., network isolation, access control, encryption).
    • Secrets Management Misconfiguration (AWS Secrets Manager): If Secrets Manager is used for credential storage, misconfigurations in access policies or secret rotation could lead to vulnerabilities.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Deployment:

    • Cloud deployment introduces cloud-specific security considerations related to IAM, networking, and managed services.
    • Secure configuration of AWS services is crucial for the overall security of Cartography.

2.7. Build Components (GitHub, CI/CD Pipeline, Container Registry)

  • Security Implications:

    • Compromised CI/CD Pipeline: If the CI/CD pipeline is compromised, attackers could inject malicious code into Cartography builds, leading to supply chain attacks.
    • Insecure Secrets Management in CI/CD: Exposing secrets (API keys, credentials) within the CI/CD pipeline configuration or logs could lead to credential compromise.
    • Dependency Vulnerabilities (Build Dependencies): Vulnerabilities in build tools or dependencies used in the CI/CD pipeline could be exploited.
    • Container Registry Vulnerabilities: Vulnerabilities in the Container Registry itself or insecure access control could lead to unauthorized access or modification of container images.
    • Lack of Code Review or Insufficient Security Scanning: Inadequate code review processes or insufficient security scanning in the CI/CD pipeline could allow vulnerabilities to be introduced into the codebase.
    • Compromised Developer Workstations: If developer workstations are compromised, attackers could potentially inject malicious code or steal credentials used for development and CI/CD.

  • Specific Security Considerations for Cartography Build Process:

    • The build process is a critical part of the software supply chain. Security vulnerabilities here can have a wide impact.
    • Ensuring the integrity and security of the CI/CD pipeline and build artifacts is essential.

3. Architecture, Components, and Data Flow Inference

Based on the diagrams and descriptions, we can infer the following architecture, components, and data flow:

  • Architecture: Cartography follows a typical three-tier architecture:

    • Presentation Tier: Web UI for user interaction.
    • Application Tier: API Server for business logic and data access.
    • Data Tier: Graph Database for storing cloud inventory data.
    • Background Processing Tier: Data Collection Service and Task Queue for asynchronous data ingestion.

  • Components:

    • Web UI: Front-end application for users to visualize and interact with cloud inventory data.
    • API Server: REST API providing programmatic access to Cartography's functionalities and data.
    • Graph Database (Neo4j assumed): Stores cloud assets and relationships as a graph.
    • Data Collection Service: Collects data from cloud provider APIs.
    • Task Queue (Redis/SQS assumed): Manages asynchronous data collection tasks.
    • Cloud Provider APIs (AWS, Azure, GCP, etc.): Source of cloud inventory data.
    • Security/Compliance Tools (SIEM, SOAR, GRC): Integrate with Cartography API for enhanced analysis.
    • AWS ECS, Load Balancer, Managed Services: Deployment infrastructure in AWS cloud.
    • GitHub, GitHub Actions, Container Registry: Build and CI/CD pipeline.

  • Data Flow:

    1. Data Collection: Data Collection Service, triggered by schedule or API request, retrieves inventory data from Cloud Provider APIs using configured credentials.
    2. Task Queuing: Data Collection Service enqueues data processing tasks into the Task Queue.
    3. Data Processing: Data Collection Service (or potentially other workers) retrieves tasks from the Task Queue and processes the data.
    4. Data Storage: Processed data is written to the Graph Database, representing cloud assets and relationships.
    5. API Access: Web UI and Security/Compliance Tools make API requests to the API Server to retrieve and manipulate data.
    6. Data Retrieval: API Server queries the Graph Database to fetch requested data.
    7. Data Presentation: Web UI presents the data to users in a visual format. Security/Compliance Tools consume data for analysis and reporting.

  • Sensitive Data Flow Points:

    • Cloud Provider Credentials: Stored and used by Data Collection Service.
    • Cloud Inventory Data: Transmitted from Cloud Provider APIs to Data Collection Service, stored in Graph Database, and accessed via API Server and Web UI.
    • API Communication: Between Web UI, API Server, and Security/Compliance Tools.

4. Specific Security Recommendations for Cartography

Based on the analysis, here are specific security recommendations tailored to Cartography:

4.1. Authentication and Authorization:

  • Recommendation 1 (Web UI & API): Implement robust authentication for both the Web UI and API Server. For the Web UI, integrate with organizational Identity Providers (IdP) using SAML/OIDC for Single Sign-On (SSO). For the API Server, support API keys for programmatic access and consider OAuth 2.0 for delegated authorization, especially for integrations with Security/Compliance Tools.
  • Recommendation 2 (RBAC): Implement Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) within Cartography. Define granular roles with least privilege access to different functionalities and data sets. For example, roles could differentiate between read-only access, data collection management, and administrative functions.
  • Recommendation 3 (API Key Management): For API keys, implement secure generation, storage (encrypted at rest), and rotation mechanisms. Provide users with the ability to manage their API keys (generate, revoke, rotate).
  • Recommendation 4 (Session Management): Implement secure session management for the Web UI, including:
    • Use HTTP-only and Secure flags for session cookies.
    • Implement session timeouts with inactivity checks.
    • Rotate session IDs after authentication.
    • Consider using anti-CSRF tokens to protect against Cross-Site Request Forgery.

4.2. Input Validation and Sanitization:

  • Recommendation 5 (Cloud Provider API Data): Implement strict input validation for data received from cloud provider APIs. Validate data types, formats, and ranges to prevent unexpected data from causing errors or vulnerabilities. Consider using schema validation libraries to enforce data structure.
  • Recommendation 6 (User Inputs): Sanitize and encode all user inputs in the Web UI and API Server to prevent injection attacks (XSS, Cypher Injection, etc.). Use context-aware output encoding to ensure data is safely rendered in different contexts (HTML, JSON, etc.). For Cypher queries, use parameterized queries or prepared statements to avoid dynamic query construction from user inputs.
  • Recommendation 7 (API Request Validation): Implement robust input validation for all API requests. Define and enforce API schemas to ensure requests conform to expected formats and data types.

4.3. Cryptography and Credential Management:

  • Recommendation 8 (Data at Rest Encryption): Enable encryption at rest for the Graph Database to protect sensitive cloud inventory data. Utilize the encryption features provided by the chosen Graph Database (e.g., Neo4j Enterprise Edition encryption). For managed Graph Database services like AWS Neptune, ensure encryption at rest is enabled and properly configured.
  • Recommendation 9 (Data in Transit Encryption): Enforce HTTPS for all communication channels, including:
    • Web UI to API Server.
    • API Server to Security/Compliance Tools.
    • Data Collection Service to Cloud Provider APIs (ensure cloud provider APIs are accessed over HTTPS).
    • Internal communication between Cartography components (if applicable and sensitive).
  • Recommendation 10 (Secure Credential Management): Implement a secure credential management strategy for cloud provider API keys and other sensitive credentials.
    • Do not store credentials in code or configuration files directly.
    • Utilize a dedicated secrets management service like AWS Secrets Manager, HashiCorp Vault, or similar to store and manage credentials securely.
    • Retrieve credentials programmatically at runtime from the secrets management service.
    • Implement least privilege access control for accessing secrets within the secrets management service.
    • Implement credential rotation policies to regularly rotate cloud provider API keys and other credentials.

4.4. Dependency Management and Security Scanning:

  • Recommendation 11 (Dependency Scanning): Implement automated dependency scanning in the CI/CD pipeline and regularly in production environments. Use tools like pip-audit (for Python dependencies) and vulnerability databases to identify and track known vulnerabilities in third-party libraries.
  • Recommendation 12 (Dependency Updates): Establish a process for regularly updating dependencies to patch known vulnerabilities. Prioritize updates for critical and high-severity vulnerabilities. Automate dependency updates where possible (e.g., using Dependabot).
  • Recommendation 13 (SAST and DAST): Integrate Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools into the CI/CD pipeline.
    • SAST: Use tools like Bandit (for Python) to analyze the source code for potential security vulnerabilities during the build process.
    • DAST: Use tools like OWASP ZAP to perform dynamic security testing of the deployed application (Web UI and API Server) to identify vulnerabilities in a running environment.
  • Recommendation 14 (Container Image Scanning): Implement container image scanning in the CI/CD pipeline and for images stored in the Container Registry. Use tools like Clair, Trivy, or cloud provider's container scanning services to identify vulnerabilities in container base images and dependencies.

4.5. Deployment Security:

  • Recommendation 15 (Least Privilege IAM Roles): Apply the principle of least privilege when configuring IAM roles for ECS tasks and other AWS resources used by Cartography. Grant only the necessary permissions required for each component to perform its intended function. Regularly review and refine IAM policies.
  • Recommendation 16 (Network Security Groups): Configure Network Security Groups (NSGs) to restrict network access to Cartography components. Implement a deny-by-default approach and only allow necessary inbound and outbound traffic. Isolate components within different security groups based on their function and trust level.
  • Recommendation 17 (Container Hardening): Harden container images by:
    • Using minimal base images.
    • Removing unnecessary packages and tools from container images.
    • Running containers as non-root users.
    • Implementing security best practices for Dockerfile creation.
  • Recommendation 18 (Security Audits and Penetration Testing): Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing of Cartography to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses in a production-like environment. Engage external security experts for independent assessments.

4.6. Build Process Security:

  • Recommendation 19 (Secure CI/CD Pipeline): Secure the CI/CD pipeline by:
    • Implementing access control to the CI/CD system and pipeline configurations.
    • Securely managing secrets used in the CI/CD pipeline (using secrets management services).
    • Regularly auditing CI/CD pipeline configurations and logs.
    • Implementing code review processes for all code changes.
  • Recommendation 20 (Supply Chain Security): Enhance supply chain security by:
    • Verifying the integrity of dependencies and build tools.
    • Using signed container images and verifying signatures.
    • Regularly scanning container images in the Container Registry for vulnerabilities.

4.7. Monitoring and Logging:

  • Recommendation 21 (Security Logging and Monitoring): Implement comprehensive security logging and monitoring for all Cartography components. Log security-relevant events such as authentication attempts, authorization failures, API requests, data access, and errors. Integrate logs with a SIEM system for centralized monitoring and alerting.
  • Recommendation 22 (Alerting and Incident Response): Set up alerts for suspicious activities and security events. Establish an incident response plan to handle security incidents related to Cartography.

5. Actionable Mitigation Strategies

Here are actionable mitigation strategies applicable to the identified threats, tailored to Cartography:

Threat Category Specific Threat Example Actionable Mitigation Strategy Cartography Component(s)
Authentication & Authorization Unauthorized access to Web UI Implement SAML/OIDC integration for Web UI authentication, linking to organizational IdP. Enforce strong password policies if local accounts are used (discouraged). Web UI
API Key compromise Use AWS Secrets Manager (or similar) to store API keys. Retrieve keys programmatically. Implement API key rotation and revocation features. API Server, Data Collection Service
Privilege escalation via Web UI Implement granular RBAC based on user roles. Define roles for viewing, managing data collection, and administration. Enforce RBAC in Web UI and API Server. Web UI, API Server
Input Validation & Injection XSS in Web UI Implement context-aware output encoding in the Web UI framework (e.g., using templating engine's auto-escaping features). Use Content Security Policy (CSP) to further mitigate XSS. Web UI
Cypher Injection in API Server Use parameterized Cypher queries when interacting with the Graph Database. Avoid dynamic query construction from user inputs. API Server, Graph Database
Data Collection Service processing malicious cloud API responses Implement schema validation for data received from cloud provider APIs. Validate data types and formats. Handle unexpected data gracefully and log errors. Data Collection Service
Cryptography & Credential Management Cloud provider API key exposure in logs Avoid logging sensitive data, especially credentials. Implement secure logging practices. Sanitize logs before storage. Use structured logging to facilitate redaction if necessary. Data Collection Service, API Server
Data breach of Graph Database at rest Enable encryption at rest for the Graph Database (e.g., using Neo4j Enterprise Edition or AWS Neptune encryption). Graph Database
Man-in-the-middle attack on API communication Enforce HTTPS for all API communication (Web UI to API Server, API Server to Security Tools). Configure Load Balancer for HTTPS termination. Web UI, API Server, Load Balancer
Dependency & Build Security Vulnerable dependency in Web UI Integrate npm audit (or equivalent) in CI/CD pipeline to scan front-end dependencies. Use pip-audit for Python dependencies. Regularly update dependencies. Build Process, Web UI, API Server, Data Collection Service
Compromised CI/CD pipeline injecting malicious code Implement access control to CI/CD system. Use dedicated service accounts with least privilege. Enable audit logging for CI/CD activities. Review pipeline configurations regularly. Build Process, CI/CD Pipeline
Deployment Security Overly permissive IAM roles for ECS tasks Apply least privilege principle to IAM roles. Grant only necessary permissions to each ECS task. Regularly review and refine IAM policies. Use IAM policy simulator to validate policies. AWS ECS, Deployment
Open Network Security Groups exposing API Server Configure Network Security Groups to restrict access. Only allow necessary inbound traffic to Load Balancer (HTTPS). Restrict outbound traffic from ECS tasks to only required services. AWS ECS, Load Balancer, Deployment

By implementing these specific and actionable mitigation strategies, the development team can significantly enhance the security posture of Cartography and reduce the identified risks, making it a more secure and reliable tool for cloud security posture management. Regular security reviews and continuous monitoring are essential to maintain a strong security posture over time.