OWASP API notes
Vulnerability I - Broken Object Level Authorization (BOLA)
How does it Happen?
BOLA refers to Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) - which creates a
scenario where the user uses the input functionality and gets access to the
resources they are not authorized to access. In an API, such controls
are usually implemented through programming in Models (Model-View-Controller
Architecture) at the code level.
Likely Impact
The absence of controls to prevent unauthorized object access
can lead to data leakage and, in some cases, complete account takeover. User's
or subscribers' data in the database plays a critical role in an organization’s brand
reputation; if such data is leaked over the internet, that may result in
substantial financial loss.
Mitigation Measures
·
An authorization mechanism that relies on user policies and
hierarchies should be adequately implemented.
·
Strict access controls methods to check if the logged-in user is authorized to
perform specific actions.
·
Promote using completely random values (strong encryption and decryption
mechanism) for nearly impossible-to-predict tokens.
Vulnerability II -
Broken User Authentication (BUA)
How does it happen?
User authentication is
the core aspect of developing any application containing sensitive data. Broken
User Authentication (BUA) reflects a scenario where an API endpoint allows an
attacker to access a database or acquire a higher privilege than the existing
one. The primary reason behind BUA is either invalid implementation of
authentication like using incorrect email/password queries etc., or the absence
of security mechanisms like authorization headers, tokens etc.
Consider a scenario in
which an attacker acquires the capability to abuse an authentication
API; it will eventually result in data leaks, deletion, modification, or even
the complete account takeover by the attacker. Usually, hackers have created
special scripts to profile, enumerate users on a system and identify
authentication endpoints. A poorly implemented authentication system can lead
any user to take on another user's identity.
Likely Impact
In broken user authentication, attackers can compromise the
authentication mechanism and easily access sensitive data. Malicious actors can
pretend to be someone authorized and can conduct an undesired
activity, including a complete account takeover.
Mitigation Measures
Ensure complex passwords with higher entropy for end users.
Do not expose sensitive credentials in GET or POST requests.
Enable strong JSON Web Tokens (JWT), authorization headers
etc.
Ensure the implementation of multifactor authentication (where
possible), account lockout, or a captcha system to mitigate brute force against
particular users.
Ensure that passwords are not saved in plain text in the database to
avoid further account takeover by the attacker.
Vulnerability III -
Excessive Data Exposure
How does it happen?
Excessive data
exposure occurs when applications tend to disclose more than desired
information to the user through an API response. The application developers
tend to expose all object properties (considering the generic implementations)
without considering their sensitivity level. They leave the filtration task to
the front-end developer before it is displayed to the user. Consequently, an
attacker can intercept the response through the API and quickly extract the
desired confidential data. The runtime detection tools or the general security
scanning tools can give an alert on this kind of vulnerability. However, it
cannot differentiate between legitimate data that is supposed to be returned or
sensitive data.
Likely Impact
A malicious actor can successfully sniff the traffic and easily access
confidential data, including personal details, such as account numbers, phone
numbers, access tokens and much more. Typically, APIs respond with sensitive
tokens that can be later on used to make calls to other critical endpoints.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Never leave sensitive data filtration tasks to the front-end
developer.
·
Ensure time-to-time review of the response from the API to guarantee it
returns only legitimate data and checks if it poses any security issue.
·
Avoid using generic methods such as to_string() and to_json().
·
Use API endpoint testing through various test cases and verify through
automated and manual tests if the API leaks additional data.
Vulnerability IV - Lack of Resources &
Rate Limiting
How does it happen?
Lack of resources and
rate limiting means that APIs do not enforce any restriction on the frequency
of clients' requested resources or the files' size, which badly affects the API
server performance and leads to the DoS (Denial of Service) or non-availability
of service. Consider a scenario where an API limit is not enforced, thus
allowing a user (usually an intruder) to upload several GB files simultaneously
or make any number of requests per second. Such API endpoints will result in
excessive resource utilization in network, storage, compute etc.
Nowadays, attackers
are using such attacks to ensure the non-availability of service for an
organization, thus tarnishing the brand reputation through increased downtime.
A simple example is non-compliance with the Captcha system on the login form,
allowing anyone to make numerous queries to the database through a small script
written in Pytho
Likely Impact
The attack primarily targets the Availability principles of security;
however, it can tarnish the brand's reputation and cause financial loss.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Ensure using a captcha to avoid requests from automated scripts and
bots.
·
Ensure implementation of a limit, i.e., how often a client can call an
API within a specified time and notify instantly when the limit is
exceeded.
·
Ensure to define the maximum data size on all parameters and payloads,
i.e., max string length and max number of array elements.
Vulnerability V - Broken Function Level Authorization
How does it happen?
Broken Function Level Authorization reflects a scenario where
a low privileged user (e.g., sales) bypasses system checks and gets access to
confidential data by impersonating a high privileged user (Admin). Consider a
scenario of complex access control policies with various hierarchies, roles,
and groups and a vague separation between regular and administrative functions
leading to severe authorization flaws. By taking advantage of these
issues, the intruders can easily access the unauthorized resources of
another user or, most dangerously – the administrative functions.
Broken Function Level Authorization reflects IDOR permission,
where a user, most probably an intruder, can perform administrative-level
tasks. APIs with complex user roles and permissions that can span the hierarchy
are more prone to this attack.
Likely Impact
The attack primarily targets the authorization and
non-repudiation principles of security. Broken Functional Level Authorization can
lead an intruder to impersonate an authorized user and let the
malicious actor get administrative rights to perform sensitive tasks.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Ensure proper design and testing of all authorization systems
and deny all access by default.
·
Ensure that the operations are only allowed to the users belonging to
the authorized group.
·
Make sure to review API endpoints against flaws regarding functional
level authorization and keep in mind the apps and group hierarchy's
business logic.
Vulnerability VI -
Mass Assignment
How does it happen?
Mass assignment
reflects a scenario where client-side data is automatically bound with
server-side objects or class variables. However, hackers exploit the feature by
first understanding the application's business logic and sending specially
crafted data to the server, acquiring administrative access or inserting
tampered data. This functionality is widely exploited in the latest frameworks
like Laravel, Code Ignitor etc.
Consider a user's
profiles dashboard where users can update their profile like associated email,
name, address etc. The username of the user is a read-only attribute and cannot
be changed; however, a malicious actor can edit the username and submit the form.
If necessary, filtration is not enabled on the server side (model), it will
simply insert/update the data in the database.
Likely Impact
The attack may result
in data tampering and privilege escalation from a regular user to an
administrator.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Avoid using functions that bind an input from a client to code variables
automatically.
·
Allowlist those properties only that need to get updated from the client
side.
Vulnerability VII -
Security Misconfiguration
How does it happen?
Security
misconfiguration depicts an implementation of incorrect and poorly configured
security controls that put the security of the whole API at stake. Several
factors can result in security misconfiguration, including improper/incomplete
default configuration, publicly accessible cloud storage, Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS), and error messages displayed with sensitive data.
Intruders can take advantage of these misconfigurations to perform detailed
reconnaissance and get unauthorized access to the system.
Security
misconfigurations are usually detected by vulnerability scanners or auditing
tools and thus can be curtailed at the initial level. API documentation, a list
of endpoints, error logs etc., must not be publicly accessible to
ensure safety against security misconfigurations. Typically, companies deploy
security controls like web application firewalls, which are not configured to
block undesired requests and attacks.
Likely Impact
Security
misconfiguration can give intruders complete knowledge of API components.
Firstly, it allows intruders to bypass security mechanisms. Stack trace or
other detailed errors can provide the malicious actor access to confidential
data and essential system details, further aiding the intruder in profiling the
system and gaining entry.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Limit access to the administrative interfaces for authorized users
and disable them for other users.
·
Disable default usernames and passwords for public-facing devices
(routers, Web Application Firewall etc.).
·
Disable directory listing and set proper permissions for every file and
folder.
·
Remove unnecessary pieces of code snippets, error logs etc. and turn off
debugging while the code is in production.
Vulnerability VIII - Injection
How does it happen?
Injection attacks are
probably among the oldest API/web-based attacks and are still being carried out
by hackers on real-world applications. Injection flaws occur when user input is
not filtered and is directly processed by an API; thus, enabling the attacker
to perform unintended API actions without authorization. An injection may come
from Structure Query Language (SQL), operating system (OS)
commands, Extensible Markup Language (XML) etc. Nowadays, frameworks offer
functionality to protect against this attack through automatic sanitization of
data; however, applications built in custom frameworks like core PHP are still
susceptible to such attacks.
Likely Impact
Injection flaws may
lead to information disclosure, data loss, DoS, and complete account takeover.
The successful injection attacks may also cause the intruders to access the
sensitive data or even create new functionality and perform remote code execution.
Mitigation Measures
·
Ensure to use a well-known library for client-side input validation.
·
If a framework is not used, all client-provided data must be validated
first and then filtered and sanitized.
·
Add necessary security rules to the Web Application Firewall (WAF). Most
of the time, injection flaws can be mitigated at the network level.
·
Make use of built-in filters in frameworks like Laravel, Code Ignitor
etc., to validate and filter data.
Vulnerability IX - Improper Assets Management
How does it happen?
Inappropriate Asset
Management refers to a scenario where we have two versions of an API available
in our system; let's name them APIv1 and APIv2. Everything is wholly switched
to APIv2, but the previous version, APIv1, has not been deleted yet. Considering
this, one might easily guess that the older version of the API, i.e., APIv1,
doesn't have the updated or the latest security features. Plenty of other
obsolete features of APIv1 make it possible to find vulnerable scenarios, which
may lead to data leakage and server takeover via a shared database amongst API
versions.
It is essentially
about not properly tracking API endpoints. The potential reasons could be
incomplete API documentation or absence of compliance with the Software Development Life Cycle. A properly maintained,
up-to-date API inventory and proper documentation are more critical than
hardware-based security control for an organization.
Likely Impact
The older or the
unpatched API versions can allow the intruders to get unauthorized access
to confidential data or even complete control of the system.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Access to previously developed sensitive and deprecated API calls must
be blocked at the network level.
·
APIs developed for R&D, QA, production etc., must be segregated and
hosted on separate servers.
·
Ensure documentation of all API aspects, including authentication,
redirects, errors, CORS policy, and rate limiting.
·
Adopt open standards to generate documentation automatically.
Vulnerability X - Insufficient Logging & Monitoring
How does it happen?
Insufficient logging & monitoring reflects a
scenario when an attacker conducts malicious activity on your server; however,
when you try to track the hacker, there is not enough evidence available due to
the absence of logging and monitoring mechanisms. Several organizations only
focus on infrastructure logging like network events or server logging but lack
API logging and monitoring. Information like the visitor's IP address,
endpoints accessed, input data etc., along with a timestamp, enables the
identification of threat attack patterns. If logging mechanisms are not in
place, it would be challenging to identify the attacker and their details.
Nowadays, the latest web frameworks can automatically log requests at different
levels like error, debug, info etc. These errors can be logged in a database or
file or even passed to a SIEM solution for detailed analysis.
Likely Impact
Inability to identify
attacker or hacker behind the attack.
Mitigation
Measures
·
Ensure use of the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
system for log management.
·
Keep track of all denied accesses, failed authentication attempts, and input
validation errors, using a format imported by SIEM and enough detail to
identify the intruder.
·
Handle logs as sensitive data and ensure their integrity at rest and
transit. Moreover, implement custom alerts to detect suspicious activities as
well.
No comments :
Post a Comment