Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
230 lines (182 loc) · 15.5 KB

attack-tree.md

File metadata and controls

230 lines (182 loc) · 15.5 KB

Attack Tree Analysis for wailsapp/wails

Objective: Compromise Wails Application by Exploiting Wails-Specific Weaknesses (High-Risk Paths)

Attack Tree Visualization

Root: Compromise Wails Application (via Wails-Specific Weaknesses) - [CRITICAL NODE] ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 1. Exploit Backend Vulnerabilities via Exposed Go Functions - [CRITICAL NODE] │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 1.1. Injection Vulnerabilities in Exposed Go Functions - [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 1.1.1. Command Injection via Go Function - [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 1.1.2. SQL Injection via Go Function (if database interaction) - [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ └── [CRITICAL NODE] 1.1.4. Code Injection via Go Function (e.g., eval in Go - less likely but possible if misused) │ └── [CRITICAL NODE] 1.3. Memory Safety Issues in Go Backend │ └── [CRITICAL NODE] 1.3.1. Buffer Overflow in Go Code (if using unsafe operations) ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2. Exploit Frontend Vulnerabilities to Impact Backend via Wails Bridge │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2.1. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) to Bridge Exploitation - [CRITICAL NODE] │ │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2.1.1. Stored XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls │ │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2.1.2. Reflected XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls │ │ └── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2.1.3. DOM-Based XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls │ ├── [HIGH-RISK PATH] 2.2.2. Bypassing Frontend Validation to Send Malicious Data to Backend │ └── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential] 2.3. JavaScript Bridge Manipulation (if Wails API allows direct access) │ ├── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential] 2.3.1. Directly Calling Internal Wails Bridge Functions (if exposed) │ └── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential] 2.3.2. Overloading or Re-defining Wails Bridge Functions (if possible) └── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if insecure IPC] 3. Exploit Insecure Inter-Process Communication (IPC) - Wails Bridge └── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if IPC vulnerable] 3.2. IPC Tampering/Injection └── [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if IPC vulnerable] 3.2.2. Directly Injecting Malicious Messages into IPC Channel └── [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist] 4. Exploit Wails Framework Vulnerabilities └── [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist] 4.1. Known Vulnerabilities in Wails Framework (check CVEs, security advisories) └── [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist] 4.1.1. Exploiting Publicly Disclosed Wails Vulnerabilities └── [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist] 4.2. Zero-day Vulnerabilities in Wails Framework └── [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist] 4.2.1. Exploiting Undiscovered Vulnerabilities in Wails Core Code

Attack Tree Path: 1. Exploit Backend Vulnerabilities via Exposed Go Functions - [CRITICAL NODE]

Attack Vector Category: Backend Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Attackers target vulnerabilities within the Go backend code that is exposed to the frontend via Wails' bridge. Successful exploitation can lead to severe consequences due to backend's privileged access.

    • Mitigation Strategies:
      • Rigorous input validation and sanitization in Go functions.
      • Secure coding practices in Go, focusing on memory safety and concurrency.
      • Regular security audits and code reviews of Go backend code.
      • Principle of least privilege in backend logic.

1.1. Injection Vulnerabilities in Exposed Go Functions - [CRITICAL NODE]

  • Attack Vector Category: Injection Attacks

  • Description: Attackers inject malicious code or commands through frontend inputs that are not properly sanitized and are then processed by vulnerable Go functions.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Input Validation and Sanitization: Treat all frontend data as untrusted. Implement strict validation and sanitization in Go functions.
      • Parameterized Queries/Prepared Statements: Use parameterized queries for database interactions to prevent SQL injection.
      • Avoid Dynamic Command Execution: Avoid directly executing shell commands based on frontend input. If necessary, use secure alternatives and strict input validation.
      • Path Sanitization: For file system operations, sanitize file paths and use whitelisting for allowed directories.

    • 1.1.1. Command Injection via Go Function - [CRITICAL NODE]

      • Likelihood: Medium
      • Impact: Critical
      • Effort: Medium
      • Skill Level: Intermediate
      • Detection Difficulty: Medium (with logging), Hard (without logging)
      • Mitigation: As described above for Injection Vulnerabilities.

    • 1.1.2. SQL Injection via Go Function (if database interaction) - [CRITICAL NODE]

      • Likelihood: Medium
      • Impact: Critical (Data Breach)
      • Effort: Medium
      • Skill Level: Intermediate
      • Detection Difficulty: Medium (with database monitoring), Hard (without monitoring)
      • Mitigation: As described above for Injection Vulnerabilities, specifically using parameterized queries/ORMs.

    • 1.1.4. Code Injection via Go Function (e.g., eval in Go - less likely but possible if misused) - [CRITICAL NODE]

      • Likelihood: Low (Go discourages eval-like practices)
      • Impact: Critical
      • Effort: High
      • Skill Level: Advanced
      • Detection Difficulty: Hard
      • Mitigation: Avoid dynamic code execution based on frontend input. If absolutely necessary, use secure sandboxing and carefully control the execution environment.

1.3. Memory Safety Issues in Go Backend - [CRITICAL NODE]

  • Attack Vector Category: Memory Corruption

  • Description: Exploiting memory safety vulnerabilities in Go backend code, potentially leading to crashes, code execution, or denial of service.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Adhere to Go's memory safety principles.
      • Minimize or eliminate the use of the unsafe package.
      • Thorough code reviews and use of memory safety analysis tools.
      • Proper resource management to prevent memory leaks.

    • 1.3.1. Buffer Overflow in Go Code (if using unsafe operations) - [CRITICAL NODE]

      • Likelihood: Low (Go is memory-safe by default)
      • Impact: Critical (System Crash, Code Execution)
      • Effort: High
      • Skill Level: Expert
      • Detection Difficulty: Hard
      • Mitigation: As described above for Memory Safety Issues.

Attack Tree Path: 2. Exploit Frontend Vulnerabilities to Impact Backend via Wails Bridge

  • Attack Vector Category: Frontend Exploitation leading to Backend Impact

  • Description: Attackers leverage vulnerabilities in the frontend (HTML, JavaScript, CSS) to manipulate or exploit the Wails bridge and indirectly compromise the backend.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Robust output encoding and sanitization in the frontend to prevent XSS.
      • Content Security Policy (CSP) to mitigate XSS risks.
      • Secure DOM manipulation practices in JavaScript.
      • Backend validation and authorization for all actions triggered from the frontend.
      • Treat frontend validation as a UX feature, not a security control.

    • 2.1. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) to Bridge Exploitation - [CRITICAL NODE]

      • Attack Vector Category: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

      • Description: Injecting malicious scripts into the frontend to execute in users' browsers. These scripts can then interact with the Wails bridge to perform unauthorized actions on the backend.

        • Mitigation: As described above for Frontend Exploitation, specifically focusing on XSS prevention techniques.

        • 2.1.1. Stored XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls

          • Likelihood: Medium
          • Impact: Medium (Session Hijacking, Malicious Actions via Bridge)
          • Effort: Medium
          • Skill Level: Intermediate
          • Detection Difficulty: Medium (with code review), Hard (without review)

        • 2.1.2. Reflected XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls

          • Likelihood: Medium
          • Impact: Medium (Session Hijacking, Malicious Actions via Bridge)
          • Effort: Low
          • Skill Level: Beginner
          • Detection Difficulty: Easy (if obvious), Medium (if subtle)

        • 2.1.3. DOM-Based XSS leading to Malicious Bridge Calls

          • Likelihood: Medium
          • Impact: Medium (Session Hijacking, Malicious Actions via Bridge)
          • Effort: Medium
          • Skill Level: Intermediate
          • Detection Difficulty: Medium (requires JavaScript code review)

    • 2.2.2. Bypassing Frontend Validation to Send Malicious Data to Backend

      • Attack Vector Category: Frontend Logic Bypass

      • Description: Attackers manipulate the frontend to bypass client-side validation and send malicious or unexpected data to the backend via the Wails bridge.

        • Mitigation: Backend validation and sanitization are crucial. Never rely solely on frontend validation for security.

        • Likelihood: High

        • Impact: Varies (depending on backend vulnerability)

        • Effort: Low

        • Skill Level: Beginner

        • Detection Difficulty: Medium (backend validation should catch, depends on logging)

    • 2.3. JavaScript Bridge Manipulation (if Wails API allows direct access) - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential]

      • Attack Vector Category: Direct Bridge Manipulation

      • Description: Attackers attempt to directly manipulate or exploit the Wails bridge from the frontend JavaScript, potentially by calling internal functions or redefining bridge behavior.

        • Mitigation: Thoroughly review Wails API and ensure internal bridge functions are not directly accessible or exploitable. Follow Wails security guidelines for bridge communication. Monitor for unexpected bridge behavior.

        • 2.3.1. Directly Calling Internal Wails Bridge Functions (if exposed) - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential]

          • Likelihood: Low (Wails likely prevents direct access)
          • Impact: Potentially Critical
          • Effort: High
          • Skill Level: Expert
          • Detection Difficulty: Hard

        • 2.3.2. Overloading or Re-defining Wails Bridge Functions (if possible) - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential]

          • Likelihood: Very Low (Framework likely prevents this)
          • Impact: Potentially Critical
          • Effort: Expert
          • Skill Level: Expert
          • Detection Difficulty: Hard

Attack Tree Path: 3. Exploit Insecure Inter-Process Communication (IPC) - Wails Bridge - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if insecure IPC]

  • Attack Vector Category: IPC Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Exploiting vulnerabilities in the inter-process communication mechanism used by Wails to connect the frontend and backend. This is relevant if the IPC is not properly secured.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Understand Wails' IPC mechanism and its security features.
      • Ensure IPC communication is encrypted and authenticated.
      • Validate and sanitize all data received via IPC on both frontend and backend.
      • Implement rate limiting to prevent DoS via IPC flooding.

    • 3.2. IPC Tampering/Injection - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if IPC vulnerable]

      • Attack Vector Category: IPC Injection

      • Description: Attackers attempt to inject malicious messages or tamper with messages being exchanged between the frontend and backend via the Wails IPC channel.

        • Mitigation: Thoroughly test Wails' IPC mechanism for injection vulnerabilities. Validate and sanitize all data received via IPC.

        • 3.2.2. Directly Injecting Malicious Messages into IPC Channel (if IPC mechanism is vulnerable) - [CRITICAL NODE - Potential if IPC vulnerable]

          • Likelihood: Low (Framework likely designed to prevent direct injection)
          • Impact: Critical
          • Effort: High
          • Skill Level: Expert
          • Detection Difficulty: Hard

Attack Tree Path: 4. Exploit Wails Framework Vulnerabilities - [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist]

  • Attack Vector Category: Framework Vulnerabilities

  • Description: Exploiting known or zero-day vulnerabilities within the Wails framework itself.

    • Mitigation Strategies:

      • Regularly update the Wails framework to the latest version.
      • Monitor Wails security advisories and CVEs.
      • Conduct security testing and penetration testing specifically targeting Wails framework vulnerabilities.
      • Participate in bug bounty programs if available for Wails.

    • 4.1. Known Vulnerabilities in Wails Framework (check CVEs, security advisories) - [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist]

      • Attack Vector Category: Known Vulnerabilities

      • Description: Exploiting publicly disclosed vulnerabilities in specific versions of the Wails framework.

        • Mitigation: Keep Wails framework updated.

        • 4.1.1. Exploiting Publicly Disclosed Wails Vulnerabilities - [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist]

          • Likelihood: Low (if Wails is updated), Medium (if outdated)
          • Impact: Varies
          • Effort: Low (if public exploit), Medium (if adaptation needed)
          • Skill Level: Beginner (if public exploit), Intermediate (if adaptation needed)
          • Detection Difficulty: Medium (vulnerability scanners)

    • 4.2. Zero-day Vulnerabilities in Wails Framework - [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist]

      • Attack Vector Category: Zero-day Vulnerabilities

      • Description: Exploiting previously unknown vulnerabilities in the Wails framework.

        • Mitigation: Proactive security measures, security audits, penetration testing, and anomaly detection.

        • 4.2.1. Exploiting Undiscovered Vulnerabilities in Wails Core Code - [CRITICAL NODE - if vulnerabilities exist]

          • Likelihood: Very Low (Zero-days are rare)
          • Impact: Critical
          • Effort: Expert
          • Skill Level: Expert
          • Detection Difficulty: Hard