Security/Reviews/CloudServices/Marketplace Frontend
Contents
Status
| Identity (TEMPLATE) | |
|---|---|
| Tracker Bug | - |
| Stage | Definition |
| Status | Red (Green, Yellow, Red?) |
| Release Target | |
| Health | - |
| Status Note | - |
Team
| Product manager / Feature manager | Lindsay Saunders, Stephanie Turner and Caitlin Galimidi. |
| Engineering lead | |
| Engineering manager | Payments - Andy McKay
Marketplace - |
| Security lead | Adam Muntner |
| Privacy lead | |
| Localization lead | Peiying Mo |
| Accessibility lead | - |
| QA lead | Krupa Raj |
| UX lead | Elizabeth Hunt |
| Product marketing lead | |
| Additional members | Amy Tsay - Community
Scott DeVaney - Editorial Manager |
Open issues/risks
Stage 1: Definition
Introduction
Links
- Marketplace Feed - Rapid Risk Assessment(https://mana.mozilla.org/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=37684270) - https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla.com/spreadsheets/d/1EbaWtQxKjoMgd1DMvxvQ0UVhJQyR6kB3wMt8N6QS4xQ/edit#gid=1389674548
- Jugband engineering metrics and activity for Marketplace - https://jugband.paas.allizom.org/
Related
- FXOS interception with zap: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Security/Intercepting_traffic_using_a_proxy
Use Cases
Architecture Diagram
Marketplace Frontend is represented by the UI Layer.
Stage 2: Design
Threat Model
| ID | Title | Threat | Proposed Mitigations | Threat Agent | Rating | Likelihood | Notes | Impact | Notes |
| 1 | Elevation of Privilege | Inappropriate access to read or modify data that the present user context should not be able to perform. | Malicious users | Rating # | Likelihood # | Notes. | Impact Score # – Impact | Notes. | |
| 2 | Tampering | Modifying or editing elements of Marketplace Application records | Application logic checks for proper authorization for | Threat agents | Rating # | Likelihood # | Notes. | Impact Score # – Impact | Notes. |
| 3 | Title text | Threat description | Proposed mitigation. | Threat agents | Rating # | Likelihood # | Notes. | Impact Score # – Impact | Notes. |
| 4 | Title text | Threat description | Proposed mitigation. | Threat agents | Rating # | Likelihood # | Notes. | Impact Score # – Impact | Notes. |
| 5 | Title text | Threat description | Proposed mitigation. | Threat agents | Rating # | Likelihood # | Notes. | Impact Score # – Impact | Notes. |
The Firefox Accounts threat model is inherited by Marketplace Frontend.
User Interactions
| ID | Summary | Description |
| 1. | HTTPS Port | All pages accessible only via HTTPS, all access is filtered through this point. |
| 2. | Anonymously accessible web pages | Searching the Marketplace for applications, Metrics & Statistics, portions of Developer Hub |
| 3. | Authentication reqd pages | Curation Tools, Operator Tools, Reviewer Tools, Admin Tools, portions of Developer Hub |
Client Interactions
| ID | Summary | Description |
| 2.A | Summary | Description. |
Server Interactions
| ID | Summary | Description | Path | Input | Output | CEF | CSRF |
| 3.A | Summary | Description | Path | Input | Output | CEF | CSRF |
| 3.b | Summary | Description | Path | Input | Output | CEF | CSRF |
CEF and CSRF columns indicate wether or not CEF logging or CSRF prevention is required for the interactions
Security Recommendations / Open Issues
| ID | Title | Status | Summary |
| [[1]] | Title | Status(Open/Closed) | Summary. |
| [[2]] | Title | Status(Open/Closed) | Summary. |
CEF Logging Requirements
Business Test Cases
Document application specific test cases here
Privacy Risk Analysis
(Status of and link to privacy review and outcome here)
Stage 3: Planning
Application Security Requirements
Document individual requirements for the application here (e.g. CEF logging, captcha, etc)
Operation Security Requirements
Document network/platform security requirements here (e.g. IDS concerns, firewall changes, system hardening reqs, etc)
Mana Website Creation Form
Critical Security Requirements
Itemize individual security blockers here. Reference components in section AppSec or OpSec subsections. These blockers must be addressed before the product can go live.
Stage 4: Development
Repeatable Security Test Cases
Document individual repeatable security test cases here. Include a reference to the source repo, and documentation that governs how to execute test cases.
Secure Coding Guidelines
Document specific secure coding guidelines to be followed and relate them to specific issues/requirements that are specified; capture bug ids related to those issues.
Code Review Milestones
Table 1 - itemized list of code review milestones {i.e. breakdown of specific components that will be reviewed} Table 2 - list of app components/modules that should trigger additional security review (e.g. auth, csrf, file upload handling, etc)
Stage 5: Release
Application Security Verification
These subsections should contain a list of the steps to be taken, and the status of each activity
Code Review
Automated Security Testing
Manual Security Testing
Operational Security Verification
ArcSight Information
Network Design Security Review
Database Security Review
Platform Security (Hardening & Specific Config Requirements)
Landing Criteria
This should be a table itemizing everything from Stage 3 - Critical Security Requirements, including status. For status Red=Unimplemented,Yellow=implemented,Green=tested and passed?
Stage 6: Post Implementation Review
Production Security Considerations
Document additional/ongoing work for this application (e.g. specific things to watch for in ArcSight, gaming behaviour, etc)
Post Implementation Tasks
Itemize process/kb changes developed from this project (e.g. secure coding guidelines, policy stuff, etc)
Team status notes
| status | notes | |
|---|---|---|
| Products | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
| Engineering | tbd | - |
