threat-modeling
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseThreat Modeling
威胁建模
Threat Modeling Methodologies
威胁建模方法论
STRIDE
STRIDE
STRIDE is a threat modeling framework developed by Microsoft that categorizes threats into six categories:
-
Spoofing: Impersonating something or someone else
- Examples: Fake authentication tokens, DNS spoofing, email spoofing
- Controls: Strong authentication, certificate validation, anti-spoofing measures
-
Tampering: Modifying data or code without authorization
- Examples: Man-in-the-middle attacks, code injection, data tampering
- Controls: Digital signatures, integrity checks, secure communication channels
-
Repudiation: Denying having performed an action
- Examples: Denying a transaction, denying access to resources
- Controls: Audit logging, non-repudiation services, digital signatures
-
Information Disclosure: Exposing information to unauthorized parties
- Examples: Data leakage, sensitive information in logs, insecure storage
- Controls: Encryption, access controls, data masking, secure logging
-
Denial of Service: Making a service unavailable
- Examples: DDoS attacks, resource exhaustion, application crashes
- Controls: Rate limiting, throttling, redundancy, monitoring
-
Elevation of Privilege: Gaining unauthorized higher-level access
- Examples: Privilege escalation, bypassing authorization checks
- Controls: Principle of least privilege, secure authorization, input validation
STRIDE是微软开发的威胁建模框架,将威胁分为六大类别:
-
Spoofing: 伪装成其他事物或他人
- 示例:伪造身份验证令牌、DNS spoofing、邮件冒充
- 控制措施:强身份验证、证书验证、反冒充措施
-
Tampering: 未经授权修改数据或代码
- 示例:中间人攻击、代码注入、数据篡改
- 控制措施:数字签名、完整性校验、安全通信通道
-
Repudiation: 否认已执行的操作
- 示例:否认交易行为、否认资源访问记录
- 控制措施:审计日志、不可否认服务、数字签名
-
Information Disclosure: 向未授权方泄露信息
- 示例:数据泄露、日志中的敏感信息、不安全存储
- 控制措施:加密、访问控制、数据掩码、安全日志
-
Denial of Service: 使服务不可用
- 示例:DDoS攻击、资源耗尽、应用崩溃
- 控制措施:速率限制、流量整形、冗余机制、监控
-
Elevation of Privilege: 获取未授权的高级别访问权限
- 示例:权限提升、绕过授权校验
- 控制措施:最小权限原则、安全授权、输入验证
PASTA Framework
PASTA框架
Process for Attack Simulation and Threat Analysis (PASTA) is a seven-step risk-centric methodology:
- Define Objectives: Establish business objectives and compliance requirements
- Define Technical Scope: Identify assets, data flows, and technical architecture
- Application Decomposition: Analyze application architecture and data flows
- Threat Analysis: Identify threats using threat intelligence and attack patterns
- Vulnerability Analysis: Identify and assess vulnerabilities in the system
- Attack Modeling: Model potential attacks and their impact
- Risk Analysis: Assess and prioritize risks based on business impact
攻击模拟与威胁分析流程(PASTA)是一种以风险为中心的七步方法论:
- 定义目标:确立业务目标与合规要求
- 定义技术范围:识别资产、数据流与技术架构
- 应用分解:分析应用架构与数据流
- 威胁分析:利用威胁情报与攻击模式识别威胁
- 漏洞分析:识别并评估系统中的漏洞
- 攻击建模:模拟潜在攻击及其影响
- 风险分析:基于业务影响评估并优先处理风险
LINDDUN Framework
LINDDUN框架
LINDDUN is a privacy-focused threat modeling framework:
- Linkability: Ability to link data to individuals
- Identifiability: Ability to identify individuals from data
- Non-repudiation: Inability to deny actions
- Detectability: Ability to detect data processing
- Disclosure of Information: Unauthorized information disclosure
- Unawareness: Individuals unaware of data processing
- Non-compliance: Failure to comply with regulations
LINDDUN是一个以隐私为核心的威胁建模框架:
- Linkability: 能够将数据与个人关联起来
- Identifiability: 能够从数据中识别出个人
- Non-repudiation: 无法否认已执行的操作
- Detectability: 能够检测到数据处理行为
- Disclosure of Information: 未经授权的信息泄露
- Unawareness: 个人未察觉数据处理行为
- Non-compliance: 未遵守法规要求
Attack Tree Analysis
攻击树分析
Attack Tree Structure
攻击树结构
Attack trees are hierarchical diagrams that represent different ways an attacker might achieve a goal:
- Root Node: The attacker's ultimate goal
- Intermediate Nodes: Sub-goals or attack vectors
- Leaf Nodes: Specific attack techniques or exploits
攻击树是层级化图表,展示攻击者达成目标的不同途径:
- 根节点:攻击者的最终目标
- 中间节点:子目标或攻击向量
- 叶子节点:具体攻击技术或漏洞利用
Attack Tree Analysis Process
攻击树分析流程
- Define Attack Goal: Identify what the attacker wants to achieve
- Identify Attack Vectors: Brainstorm different ways to achieve the goal
- Break Down Vectors: Decompose each vector into smaller steps
- Assign Values: Assign difficulty, cost, and risk values to each node
- Analyze Paths: Identify the most likely attack paths
- Identify Mitigations: Determine controls to block each path
- 定义攻击目标:明确攻击者想要达成的目的
- 识别攻击向量: brainstorm达成目标的不同方式
- 分解攻击向量:将每个向量拆解为更小的步骤
- 赋值评估:为每个节点分配难度、成本与风险值
- 分析路径:识别最可能的攻击路径
- 确定缓解措施:制定阻断各路径的控制措施
Common Attack Patterns
常见攻击模式
- Authentication Attacks: Credential stuffing, brute force, password spraying
- Authorization Attacks: Privilege escalation, IDOR, broken access controls
- Injection Attacks: SQL injection, command injection, XSS, LDAP injection
- Cryptographic Attacks: Weak algorithms, key management issues, padding oracle
- Network Attacks: MITM, DNS poisoning, ARP spoofing, BGP hijacking
- Social Engineering: Phishing, pretexting, baiting, tailgating
- 身份验证攻击:凭证填充、暴力破解、密码喷洒
- 授权攻击:权限提升、IDOR、访问控制失效
- 注入攻击:SQL injection、命令注入、XSS、LDAP注入
- 密码学攻击:弱算法、密钥管理问题、填充预言机攻击
- 网络攻击:MITM、DNS投毒、ARP欺骗、BGP劫持
- 社会工程学攻击:钓鱼、 pretexting、 baiting、尾随
Common Attack Patterns
常见攻击模式
OWASP Top 10
OWASP Top 10
- Broken Access Control: Restrictions on authenticated users are not properly enforced
- Cryptographic Failures: Failures related to cryptography and protection of sensitive data
- Injection: Injection flaws allow attackers to execute malicious commands
- Insecure Design: Flaws in design and architecture that enable security issues
- Security Misconfiguration: Improperly configured security settings
- Vulnerable and Outdated Components: Using components with known vulnerabilities
- Identification and Authentication Failures: Weaknesses in identity and authentication
- Software and Data Integrity Failures: Code and infrastructure without integrity protection
- Security Logging and Monitoring Failures: Insufficient logging and monitoring
- Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF): Server makes requests to unintended locations
- Broken Access Control:对已认证用户的限制未得到有效执行
- Cryptographic Failures:与密码学及敏感数据保护相关的失效
- Injection:注入漏洞允许攻击者执行恶意命令
- Insecure Design:设计与架构中的缺陷导致安全问题
- Security Misconfiguration:安全配置不当
- Vulnerable and Outdated Components:使用存在已知漏洞的组件
- Identification and Authentication Failures:身份与验证机制存在弱点
- Software and Data Integrity Failures:代码与基础设施缺乏完整性保护
- Security Logging and Monitoring Failures:日志与监控不足
- Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF):服务器向非预期位置发起请求
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
- CWE-79: Cross-site Scripting (XSS)
- CWE-89: SQL Injection
- CWE-200: Information Exposure
- CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
- CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
- CWE-502: Deserialization of Untrusted Data
- CWE-732: Incorrect Permission Assignment
- CWE-798: Use of Hard-coded Credentials
- CWE-862: Missing Authorization
- CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization
- CWE-79:Cross-site Scripting (XSS)
- CWE-89:SQL Injection
- CWE-200:信息暴露
- CWE-352:Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
- CWE-400:不受控的资源消耗
- CWE-502:反序列化不可信数据
- CWE-732:权限分配错误
- CWE-798:使用硬编码凭证
- CWE-862:缺失授权
- CWE-863:授权错误
Risk Assessment Frameworks
风险评估框架
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System)
CVSS(Common Vulnerability Scoring System)
CVSS provides a standardized way to assess vulnerability severity:
- Base Score: Intrinsic qualities of the vulnerability (Exploitability, Impact)
- Temporal Score: Characteristics that change over time (Exploit Code Maturity, Remediation Level)
- Environmental Score: Characteristics specific to the user's environment
CVSS提供标准化的漏洞严重程度评估方式:
- 基础评分:漏洞的固有属性(可利用性、影响)
- 时间评分:随时间变化的特征(漏洞利用代码成熟度、修复级别)
- 环境评分:特定于用户环境的特征
DREAD
DREAD
DREAD is a risk assessment model:
- Damage: How much damage could be caused?
- Reproducibility: How easily can the vulnerability be reproduced?
- Exploitability: How easy is it to exploit?
- Affected Users: How many users are affected?
- Discoverability: How easy is it to discover?
DREAD是一种风险评估模型:
- Damage(损害程度):可能造成多大损害?
- Reproducibility(可复现性):漏洞被复现的难度如何?
- Exploitability(可利用性):漏洞被利用的难度如何?
- Affected Users(受影响用户数):有多少用户会受到影响?
- Discoverability(可发现性):漏洞被发现的难度如何?
OWASP Risk Rating
OWASP风险评级
OWASP provides a risk rating methodology:
- Likelihood: Ease of discovery, ease of exploit, awareness, intrusion detection
- Impact: Technical impact, business impact
- Risk Score: Likelihood × Impact
OWASP提供风险评级方法论:
- 可能性:发现难度、利用难度、认知度、入侵检测能力
- 影响:技术影响、业务影响
- 风险评分:可能性 × 影响
Security Architecture Patterns
安全架构模式
Defense in Depth
Defense in Depth(纵深防御)
Layered security controls provide multiple levels of protection:
- Perimeter Security: Firewalls, WAFs, DDoS protection
- Network Security: Network segmentation, IDS/IPS, VPN
- Host Security: Endpoint protection, HIDS, application whitelisting
- Application Security: Input validation, authentication, authorization
- Data Security: Encryption, access controls, data loss prevention
分层安全控制提供多层保护:
- 边界安全:防火墙、WAF、DDoS防护
- 网络安全:网络分段、IDS/IPS、VPN
- 主机安全:终端防护、HIDS、应用白名单
- 应用安全:输入验证、身份验证、授权
- 数据安全:加密、访问控制、数据丢失防护
Zero Trust Architecture
Zero Trust Architecture(零信任架构)
Never trust, always verify:
- Identity Verification: Strong authentication for all access requests
- Device Trust: Verify device health and compliance
- Least Privilege: Grant minimum necessary access
- Micro-segmentation: Segment networks to limit lateral movement
- Continuous Monitoring: Monitor and log all access and activity
永不信任,始终验证:
- 身份验证:对所有访问请求执行强身份验证
- 设备信任:验证设备健康状态与合规性
- 最小权限:授予必要的最小访问权限
- 微分段:对网络进行分段以限制横向移动
- 持续监控:监控并记录所有访问与活动
Secure by Design
Secure by Design(设计安全)
Incorporate security from the beginning:
- Threat Modeling: Identify threats early in design
- Secure Defaults: Default to secure configurations
- Principle of Least Privilege: Minimize permissions
- Defense in Depth: Multiple layers of security
- Fail Secure: Fail to a secure state
- Security by Design: Design security into the system
从一开始就融入安全理念:
- 威胁建模:在设计早期识别威胁
- 安全默认配置:默认采用安全配置
- 最小权限原则:最小化权限
- 纵深防御:多层安全防护
- 安全失效:故障时进入安全状态
- 设计安全:将安全融入系统设计