Table of Contents
Introduction to Build Security in the SDLC
The Secure Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC) exemplifies a holistic approach, incorporating security practices and principles across all phases of software creation and deployment. Among these, the build phase is particularly crucial. It’s where source code is transformed into binary code, setting the stage for execution. This phase is pivotal for embedding security into the software, involving rigorous code examination for vulnerabilities, security policy enforcement, and ensuring that security considerations are foundational, rather than retrospective thoughts.
The Significance of Build Security in Software Development
Build security is essential for crafting secure software, serving as a proactive defense against potential vulnerabilities, and ensuring compliance with standards. This stage of the development process poses the greatest risk to the code’s integrity and confidentiality. A lapse can disseminate compromised software far and wide, making it imperative to safeguard this phase to protect end-users and maintain trust and compliance. Moreover, the build stage is instrumental in mitigating risks associated with the software supply chain, where vulnerabilities in any part can have widespread implications. Emphasizing build security lays the groundwork for future innovation, allowing organizations to evolve their development practices safely.
Highlighting Real-World Consequences
The criticality of robust build security measures is vividly illustrated by incidents like the SolarWinds Orion breach, the Codecov Bash Uploader compromise, the Event-Stream incident, the Equifax data breach, and notably, the Ledger Attack. These examples serve as stark reminders of the far-reaching impacts of security oversights during the build phase, from facilitating supply chain attacks to exposing sensitive data on a massive scale.
The Ledger Attack
The Ledger attack illustrates a sophisticated exploitation of software supply chain vulnerabilities, marking a significant event in the realm of cybersecurity. Initiated through a spear phishing attack that targeted a former Ledger employee’s NPM account, attackers were able to publish malicious versions of Ledger’s software connect-kit tool. This breach resulted in the loss of at least $600,000 from users’ hardware wallets. Unlike direct attacks on the build process, this incident leveraged the trust placed in third-party dependencies and the software supply chain, underscoring the nuanced threats facing modern software development. The breach not only exposed the critical importance of securing software dependencies but also highlighted the need for stringent access controls, credential management, and the proactive monitoring of third-party components. The Ledger incident serves as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of overlooking security in the software supply chain and the importance of adopting comprehensive security measures to protect against both direct and indirect attacks.
The SolarWinds Orion Breach
Among the most far-reaching and sophisticated in recent times, the SolarWinds Orion breach sought to exploit vulnerabilities in the build process of the SolarWinds software. Attackers planted the bad code through the build system within the process of updating the software and sent it out to 18,000 clients, including major government agencies and corporations. It highlighted just how hazardous and broad such attacks on supply chains can be.
The Codecov Bash Uploader Script Compromise
Codecov is an application for testing code coverage measures that have been breached. Attackers were able to alter its Bash Uploader script and successfully exfiltrate data from potentially thousands of clients’ environments. This breach thus emphasizes how build tools can be of potential risk and proves the integrity of build scripts and tools have to be secured.
The Event-Stream Incident
In the case of the Event-Stream incident, a hugely popular NPM package was compromised. In this package, an original maintainer handed over control to an attacker who pretended to be an eager maintainer. Later on, the attacker injected a payload into the package which has a malicious intent, targeting one particular cryptocurrency platform. This is the perfect example of a case study that showcases the risk profile of the dependency vulnerabilities and a realistic level of vetting that a company should perform on third-party packages and maintainers.
The Equifax Data Breach
The Equifax data breach, while not strictly a vulnerability in the build stage, was made much worse by failing to update a third-party library that should have been updated and was vulnerable (in this case, Apache Struts). This affected a whopping 147 million people. The Equifax breach is, in every sense, a cautionary tale about dependency management.
Emerging Threats to Build Security: A Snapshot
In the intricate web of modern software development, the build stage stands as a crucial point where source code is transformed into executable software. This phase is not just about compilation but also about ensuring the security and integrity of the final product. Recognizing the common threats faced during this stage is paramount for maintaining robust software supply chain security. For a deeper dive into these threats and comprehensive strategies for mitigation, consider exploring detailed insights into Software Supply Chain Threats in the Build Stage.
- Bypassing CI/CD Pipelines: Circumventing the safeguards of CI/CD processes allows attackers to inject malicious code directly into the build, bypassing essential security checks.
- Modifying Code Post-Source Control: Alterations made to source code after its commitment to source control can introduce unauthorized changes, undermining software integrity.
- Compromising the Build Process: Directly manipulating the build process can lead to the insertion of malicious code, tampering with the build’s provenance or disrupting the process altogether.
- Compromising Artifact Repositories: Unauthorized access to, or manipulation of, artifact repositories can disrupt the deployment process and introduce compromised software into the supply chain.
Poisoned Pipeline Execution (PPE): A Deeper Threat
Poisoned Pipeline Execution (PPE) vulnerability materializes when attackers manipulate the build process, either by altering the CI/CD pipeline configuration directly (Direct PPE, or D-PPE) or by modifying files the pipeline references (Indirect PPE, or I-PPE). Such attacks can severely compromise the software’s integrity, making early detection and protection mechanisms vital.
Understanding PPE Variants
- Direct PPE (D-PPE) occurs when attackers change the CI configuration file to run malicious commands within the build environment, bypassing standard security protocols.
- Indirect PPE (I-PPE) unfolds through modifications to external files the pipeline configures, such as scripts, enabling attackers to inject malicious code indirectly.
Implementing Effective Build Security Measures
To counter these threats and vulnerabilities in the build stage, a properly used framework and compliance with best practices as outlined by authorities such as NIST should be practiced. All the above can be improved through an application and compliance with NIST’s Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF), among other resources, improving your posture in the following ways.
Essential Build Security Best Practices:
- Secure Coding: enforce best coding security practices throughout development. Identify potential vulnerabilities by using static code analysis tools as far ahead in the build process as they can be useful.
- Software Composition Analysis (SCA): Integrate SCA tools with your CI/CD pipeline to discover open-source dependencies used in the software with known vulnerabilities and keep a current Software Bill of Materials (SBOM).
- Secure Build Environment: Use the strongest access controls that could limit unauthorized entry points into the build servers and repositories.
- Continuous monitoring tools would, in essence, point to discovering any form of suspicious activities going on in the build environment. This will be authenticated and safely transmitted down the pipeline by being signed with a digital signature. Various verification mechanisms must be established to ensure the authenticity of the artifact before deployment.
The Power of Build Attestations
Good best practices like secure coding and secure build environments are paramount, but with Xygeni Build Security Solution, they do just that. Our solution integrates with your workflows to give a comprehensive way of build security that includes the power of attestation.
Think of a build attestation as a signed document that assures the authenticity and integrity of a build. That’s exactly what build attestation is—a cryptographically signed collection of metadata documenting details of the build process. These are kind of guards to the build process and deal with many benefits that come from the following.
- Improved Transparency: Build Attestation ensures that there is confidence from having clear visibility into the build environment, tools, configurations, and dependencies used in constructing the Build. Such a transparent environment will incite trust and perhaps collaboration.
- Verification Throughout the Pipeline: Attestations make sure that for all the stages in the CI/CD pipeline, from source code to the final built artifacts, the genuineness can be verified. It checks that no unauthorized changes have occurred within the building process.
- Stronger Foundation to Monitor and Audit: Detailed data within attestations builds the foundation for continuing security analysis during the development lifecycle, allowing one to proactively detect any possible vulnerability that should be mitigated.
How Xygeni Build Security Leverages Attestations
This is where Build Security Solution takes the concept of Build Attestations one step further with automation in place, and Xygeni takes one additional giant step with a wider approach.
- Attestation Generation Automation: Xygeni, where attestation generation has to be automated, to create tamper-evident attestations without the need for manual intervention, and in a manner that provides consistent attestation in all builds.
- Secure Evidence Collection and Storage: Xygeni offers security for the way through which evidence is collected and stored. It collects the evidence with great care from every nook and corner of the build process. It stores the collection in our secure storage infrastructure, guaranteeing that the attestation is of integrity.
- Granular Verification Controls: Our solution controls the verification, which follows monotonically. It provides a set of configurable policies; checks can be included or omitted in the process, fine-tuning the latter to one’s needs.
- Insightful Real-time Threat Detection: The exhaustive feature set of reporting from Xygeni goes beyond simple pass/fail notifications. Our system provides actionable insights in your build process to help you know and fix potential vulnerabilities ahead of time.
The Xygeni Advantage: Benefits You Can Trust
By leveraging Xygeni Build Security, you gain a multitude of benefits:
- Improved Trust and Transparency: Build attestation ensures all stakeholder parties are presented with a clear build process picture, and in the process, trust and collaboration increase.
- Minimizing the Risk of Errors and Vulnerabilities: Automated attestation generation and verification minimize the risk of error and vulnerability to the humanly possible minimum, thereby delivering security consistently across the build pipeline.
- Improved Software Quality: Gain enriched threat intelligence and deep insights to ensure you can deliver higher quality, more secure software products.
- Simplified Compliance: Xygeni’s alignment with NIST SP 800-204D recommendations simplifies compliance efforts.
Ready to learn more? Contact Xygeni today to see how our Build Security solution can empower your development teams.
Watch our Video Demo
