Skip to main content

AWS Lambda security risks

And here is the list of top Lambda security risks:

1. Function event data injection: Injection flaws in applications are one of the most common risks and can be triggered not only through untrusted input such as through a web API call but due to the potential attack surface of serverless architecture, can also come from cloud storage events, NoSQL databases, code changes, message queue events and IoT telemetry signals, among others.



2. Broken authentication: Applications built for serverless architectures often contain dozens -- or even hundreds -- of serverless functions, each with a specific purpose.

These functions connect together to form overall system logic, but some of these functions may expose public web APIs, others may consume events from different source types, and others may have coding issues ripe for exploit and attacks, which lead to unauthorized authentication.

3. Insecure serverless deployment configuration: The security firm found that incorrect settings and the misconfiguration of cloud services are a common theme. This, in turn, can provide an entry point for attacks against serverless architectures, the leak of sensitive, confidential information, and potentially Man-in-The-Middle (MiTM) attacks.

4. Over-privileged function permissions and roles: Serverless applications -- and enterprise systems as a whole -- should follow the principle of "least privilege."


5. Inadequate function monitoring and logging: The reconnaissance phase of an attack, where threat actors attempt to gain intel on a network's defenses and weaknesses, is also a crucial point for cybersecurity solutions to detect suspicious behavior and shut it down.


6. Insecure third-party dependencies: When serverless functions rely on third-party software, such as open-source packages and libraries, if vulnerabilities are present, these can pave the way for exploit.

7. Insecure application secrets storage: Many apps require "secret" information to be encrypted and stored, such as API keys, passwords, configuration settings, and database credentials.


8. DDoS attacks, resources stretched to the limit: According to the study, distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks pose a serious risk to serverless architecture as there may be memory allocation, duration per function, and execution limits.


9. Serverless function execution flow manipulation: Attackers may be able to subvert application logic by tampering with application flows, leading to access control bypass, privilege escalation or denial-of-service attacks.


10. Improper exception handling and verbose error messages: Line-by-line debugging services for serverless architecture are often rather limited. As a result, some developers adopt verbose error messages, enable debugging after the fact, and they may forget to clean the code when it is moved to production.
Reference: OWASP/ PurSec

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Using an AirPcap device in Windows with Wireshark

Capturing wireless traffic in a Windows environment is unfortunately not as easy as a setting change. As with most Windows-based software, drivers in Windows are often not open source and do not allow for configuration change into monitor mode. With this in mind, we must use a specialized piece of hardware known as an AirPcap device. Once you have obtained an AirPcap device you will be required to install the software on the accompanying CD to your analysis computer. The configurable options include: • Interface - Select the device you are using for your capture here. Some advanced analysis scenarios may require you to use more than one AirPcap device to sniff simultaneously on multiple channels. • Blink LED - Clicking this button will make the LED lights on the AirPcap device blink. This is primarily used to identify the specific adapter you are using if you are using multiple AirPcap devices. • Channel - In this field, you select the channel you want AirPcap to listen on. Extension C...

Anti CSRF header

Recently I came across an application which was preventing crsf attacks using a unique non-traditional approach. In traditional approach the csrf is thwarted by embedding unique random tokens, called nonce, in each sensitive page. But this application, which was making ajax calls and used jQuery, was creating a header to identify the valid and invalid requests altogether. The idea is to generate a custom header, x-session-token in this case, with every request which is considered sensitive and includes any sort of transaction. For example: xhr.setRequestHeader('x-session-token', csrf_token)   At the server level, server checks for this header if found request is fulfilled, otherwise rejected. We need to use xhr calls for making use of this technique, not useful in regular POST and GET requests. Since, I was not aware of this kind of countermeasures, probably, since most of the applications I did were using standard requests. So, I searched a bit and found even Go...

Some one watching where you visited!

Yes... Mozilla has been susceptible to browser-history stealing java script code. Today, Giorgio posted some cool information about the exploit. Mozilla is already working on this. This bug has been reported. Actually they have set up a web site to show the proof-of-concept. Visit www.statrpanic.com in FF,Safari or Netscape and it will tell you which websites have you been already ! But I am not sure it will work in IE or not because my IE is not responding to the website. Clearing history of visited website makes you safe to this attack. I mean this is one way..may be there are other ways to exploit this. But I have found this effective. Try it yourself in FF and then in IE and see the results.