CWE-1304: Improperly Preserved Integrity of Hardware Configuration State During a Power Save/Restore Operation
Weakness ID: 1304
Vulnerability Mapping:ALLOWEDThis CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities Abstraction:
BaseBase - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
View customized information:
For users who are interested in more notional aspects of a weakness. Example: educators, technical writers, and project/program managers.For users who are concerned with the practical application and details about the nature of a weakness and how to prevent it from happening. Example: tool developers, security researchers, pen-testers, incident response analysts.For users who are mapping an issue to CWE/CAPEC IDs, i.e., finding the most appropriate CWE for a specific issue (e.g., a CVE record). Example: tool developers, security researchers.For users who wish to see all available information for the CWE/CAPEC entry.For users who want to customize what details are displayed.
×
Edit Custom Filter
Description
The product performs a power save/restore
operation, but it does not ensure that the integrity of
the configuration state is maintained and/or verified between
the beginning and ending of the operation.
Before powering down, the Intellectual
Property (IP) saves current state (S) to persistent
storage such as flash or always-on memory in order to
optimize the restore operation. During this process,
an attacker with access to the persistent storage may
alter (S) to a configuration that could potentially
modify privileges, disable protections, and/or cause
damage to the hardware. If the IP does not validate
the configuration state stored in persistent memory,
upon regaining power or becoming operational again,
the IP could be compromised through the activation of
an unwanted/harmful configuration.
Common Consequences
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
Impact
Details
DoS: Instability; DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (Other); Gain Privileges or Assume Identity; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Alter Execution Logic; Quality Degradation; Unexpected State; Reduce Maintainability; Reduce Performance; Reduce Reliability
Scope: Confidentiality, IntegrityLikelihood: High
Potential Mitigations
Phase(s)
Mitigation
Architecture and Design
Inside the IP, incorporate integrity checking
on the configuration state via a cryptographic
hash. The hash can be protected inside the IP such as
by storing it in internal registers which never lose
power. Before powering down, the IP performs a hash of
the configuration and saves it in these persistent
registers. Upon restore, the IP performs a hash of the
saved configuration and compares it with the
saved hash. If they do not match, then the IP should
not trust the configuration.
Integration
Outside the IP, incorporate integrity checking
of the configuration state via a trusted agent. Before
powering down, the trusted agent performs a hash of the
configuration and saves the hash in persistent storage.
Upon restore, the IP requests the trusted agent
validate its current configuration. If the
configuration hash is invalid, then the IP should not
trust the configuration.
Integration
Outside the IP, incorporate a protected
environment that prevents undetected modification of
the configuration state by untrusted agents. Before
powering down, a trusted agent saves the IP's
configuration state in this protected location that
only it is privileged to. Upon restore, the trusted
agent loads the saved state into the IP.
Relationships
This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this
weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to
similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition,
relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user
may want to explore.
Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (View-1000)
Nature
Type
ID
Name
ChildOf
Pillar - a weakness that is the most abstract type of weakness and represents a theme for all class/base/variant weaknesses related to it. A Pillar is different from a Category as a Pillar is still technically a type of weakness that describes a mistake, while a Category represents a common characteristic used to group related things.
Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource.
Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
Uninitialized Value on Reset for Registers Holding Security Settings
Modes
Of Introduction
The different Modes of Introduction provide information
about how and when this
weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which
introduction
may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the
given
phase.
Phase
Note
Architecture and Design
Weakness introduced via missing internal integrity guarantees during power save/restore
Integration
Weakness introduced via missing external integrity verification during power save/restore
Applicable Platforms
This listing shows possible areas for which the given
weakness could appear. These
may be for specific named Languages, Operating Systems, Architectures, Paradigms,
Technologies,
or a class of such platforms. The platform is listed along with how frequently the given
weakness appears for that instance.
Languages
Class: Not Language-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Operating Systems
Class: Not OS-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Architectures
Class: Not Architecture-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Technologies
Class: Not Technology-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Demonstrative Examples
Example 1
The following pseudo code demonstrates the
power save/restore workflow which may lead to weakness
through a lack of validation of the config state after
restore.
The following pseudo-code is the proper workflow for the integrity checking mitigation:
(good code)
Example Language: C
void save_config_state()
{
void* cfg;
void* sha;
cfg = get_config_state();
save_config_state(cfg);
// save hash(cfg) to trusted location
sha = get_hash_of_config_state(cfg);
save_hash(sha);
go_to_sleep();
}
void restore_config_state()
{
void* cfg;
void* sha_1, sha_2;
cfg = get_config_file();
// restore hash of config from trusted memory
sha_1 = get_persisted_sha_value();
sha_2 = get_hash_of_config_state(cfg);
if (sha_1 != sha_2)
assert_error_and_halt();
load_config_file(cfg);
}
It must be noted that in the previous example of
good pseudo code, the memory (where the hash of the
config state is stored) must be trustworthy while the
hardware is between the power save and restore states.
Weakness Ordinalities
Ordinality
Description
Primary
(where the weakness exists independent of other weaknesses)
Resultant
(where the weakness is typically related to the presence of some other weaknesses)
Functional Areas
Power
Memberships
This MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that
reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a
weakness fits within the context of external information sources.
Nature
Type
ID
Name
MemberOf
Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic.
(this CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities)
Reason
Acceptable-Use
Rationale
This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.
Comments
Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.
Description
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
