--- title: "MPC Vault System Security Audit Report" description: "Comprehensive security audit findings and recommendations for the MPC vault system" icon: "clipboard-check" sidebar: label: "Executive Summary" --- :::warning This audit report contains critical security findings that require immediate attention before production deployment. ::: **Date:** August 5, 2025 **Auditor:** Claude (Senior Security Auditor) **Scope:** Comprehensive security assessment of the MPC vault system for wallet operations **Version:** Sonr v0.10.15 ## Executive Summary This security audit evaluates the Multi-Party Computation (MPC) vault system implemented in Sonr's blockchain platform. The audit covers the current architecture, recent security improvements, wallet operation security, threat analysis, and production readiness assessment. ### Key Findings Overview - **Critical Issues:** 3 identified - **High Risk Issues:** 4 identified - **Medium Risk Issues:** 6 identified - **Low Risk Issues:** 8 identified :::info **Overall Security Posture:** MODERATE RISK - Suitable for testnet deployment with immediate remediation of critical issues required before mainnet deployment with user funds. ::: ## 1. Current Architecture Analysis ### 1.1 System Components The vault system consists of four primary components: **Purpose:** High-level interface for vault operations using WebAssembly enclaves **Security Features:** - Input validation framework with regex patterns - Secure error handling with sanitized messages - WASM plugin integrity verification via SHA256 hashing - Restricted host and filesystem access for WASM plugins **Purpose:** WebAssembly-based secure execution environment for MPC operations **Security Features:** - Sandboxed execution environment - Rate limiting (60 operations/minute per vault) - Resource constraints (max 100 vaults per instance) - Ownership-based access control - Configurable IPFS endpoints and timeouts **Purpose:** Blockchain state management and vault lifecycle operations **Security Features:** - Vault state persistence with enclave data separation - Integration with DID-based authentication - Service registration verification **Purpose:** Multi-party computation cryptographic operations **Security Features:** - AES-GCM encryption for data at rest - ECDSA signing with SHA3-256 hashing - Key derivation and rotation capabilities ## 2. Security Fixes Analysis ### 2.1 Recently Implemented Security Improvements Based on code analysis and git history, the following security enhancements have been implemented: ✅ **EFFECTIVE** - Restricted allowed hosts to local IPFS endpoints only - Limited file system access to `/tmp/vault-wasm` directory - Well-implemented defense against WASM plugin abuse ✅ **EFFECTIVE** - Vault ID validation with alphanumeric constraints - CID validation with Base58 format checking - Password validation with UTF-8 and size constraints - Comprehensive validation prevents injection attacks ✅ **EFFECTIVE** - SecureError type with public/internal error separation - Structured error codes prevent information leakage - Prevents sensitive information disclosure ✅ **EFFECTIVE** - 60 ops/minute per vault, max 100 vaults per instance - Protection against resource exhaustion attacks - Well-implemented DoS protection ⚠️ **PARTIALLY EFFECTIVE** - Optional SHA256 hash verification - Defaults to empty hash (backward compatibility) - Good foundation but needs enforcement in production ⚠️ **NEEDS IMPROVEMENT** - Owner-based access with pseudo-authentication - Uses vault ID as owner ID (placeholder implementation) - Insufficient for production use ## 3. Wallet Operation Security Assessment - **Strength:** Uses secure MPC protocol for key generation - **Weakness:** No entropy source verification - **Risk Level:** Medium - **CVSS Score:** 5.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N) - **Strength:** Proper ECDSA implementation with SHA3-256 - **Weakness:** Missing signature malleability protection - **Risk Level:** Medium - **CVSS Score:** 4.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N) - **Strength:** Standard ECDSA verification process - **Weakness:** No timestamp validation for replay protection - **Risk Level:** Medium - **CVSS Score:** 5.4 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N) - **Strength:** MPC refresh protocol for key rotation - **Weakness:** No automated rotation enforcement - **Risk Level:** Low - **CVSS Score:** 3.7 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L) - **Strength:** AES-GCM encryption for data at rest - **Weakness:** No integrity verification after retrieval - **Risk Level:** High - **CVSS Score:** 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N) ## 4. Threat Analysis by Risk Level ### 4.1 CRITICAL Vulnerabilities (Immediate Action Required) :::warning These vulnerabilities require immediate remediation before any production deployment. ::: - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:647-676` - **Issue:** Pseudo-authentication using vault ID as owner ID - **Impact:** Complete vault takeover by any user knowing vault ID - **CVSS Score:** 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) - **Remediation:** Implement proper JWT/OAuth2 authentication with cryptographic proofs - **Location:** `internal/vault/vault.go:138` - **Issue:** WASM hash verification disabled by default (empty ExpectedSHA256) - **Impact:** Malicious WASM plugin execution - **CVSS Score:** 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N) - **Remediation:** Enforce mandatory WASM integrity checks in production - **Location:** `x/dwn/keeper/keeper.go:404` - **Issue:** Default password generation based on predictable values - **Impact:** Vault encryption key compromise - **CVSS Score:** 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) - **Remediation:** Implement secure password derivation or user-provided passwords ### 4.2 HIGH Risk Vulnerabilities - **Location:** `crypto/mpc/enclave.go:51-68` - **Issue:** No HMAC or authenticated encryption verification after IPFS retrieval - **Impact:** Data tampering attacks on stored vault data - **CVSS Score:** 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N) - **Location:** `crypto/mpc/enclave.go:111-121` - **Issue:** ECDSA signatures vulnerable to malleability attacks - **Impact:** Transaction replay with modified signatures - **CVSS Score:** 7.4 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N) - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:321-392` - **Issue:** Direct CID usage without additional validation - **Impact:** IPFS injection attacks or resource exhaustion - **CVSS Score:** 7.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:505-568` - **Issue:** Inadequate synchronization for concurrent vault operations - **Impact:** Data corruption or inconsistent vault state - **CVSS Score:** 6.8 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) ### 4.3 MEDIUM Risk Vulnerabilities - **Location:** `crypto/mpc/enclave.go:78` - **CVSS Score:** 5.9 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N) - **Location:** Various signing functions - **CVSS Score:** 5.4 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N) - **Location:** Throughout codebase - **CVSS Score:** 4.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L) - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:986-988` - **CVSS Score:** 4.2 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N) - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:947-954` - **CVSS Score:** 5.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N) - **Location:** `cmd/vault/main.go:976-983` - **CVSS Score:** 4.9 (AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L) ### 4.4 LOW Risk Issues - LOW-001: Predictable Enclave ID Generation - LOW-002: Missing Rate Limit Bypass Protection - LOW-003: Insufficient Logging for Security Events - LOW-004: No Vault Backup/Recovery Mechanism - LOW-005: Missing Health Check Attestation Validation - LOW-006: Hardcoded Configuration Values - LOW-007: No Circuit Breaker for IPFS Operations - LOW-008: Missing Input Length Validation Edge Cases ## 5. Production Readiness Assessment ⚠️ **CONDITIONAL APPROVAL** Suitable with immediate critical fixes: - Fix CRITICAL-001 (Authentication) - Fix CRITICAL-002 (WASM Integrity) - Fix CRITICAL-003 (Default Passwords) **Timeline:** 2-3 weeks with dedicated security effort ❌ **NOT RECOMMENDED** Requires comprehensive security hardening: - All CRITICAL and HIGH issues resolved - External security audit by certified firm - Bug bounty program - Comprehensive monitoring and alerting **Timeline:** 3-4 months minimum ❌ **NOT RECOMMENDED** Requires enterprise-grade security controls: - SOC 2 Type II compliance - Multi-signature authorization workflows - Hardware Security Module (HSM) integration - Advanced threat detection and response **Timeline:** 6-8 months minimum ## 6. Remediation Recommendations ### 6.1 Immediate Actions (0-2 weeks) - Replace pseudo-authentication with JWT/OAuth2 - Add cryptographic proof of vault ownership - Implement session management with timeout - Remove backward compatibility for empty hashes - Implement automatic hash verification - Add WASM signature verification - Implement secure key derivation functions (PBKDF2/Argon2) - Add user-provided password support - Implement password strength requirements ### 6.2 Short-term Actions (2-8 weeks) - Implement HMAC for IPFS stored data - Add checksum verification after retrieval - Implement authenticated encryption (AES-GCM with additional data) - Use deterministic ECDSA (RFC 6979) - Add signature canonicalization - Implement proper nonce generation - Complete WebAuthn assertion verification - Add biometric authentication support - Implement proper challenge-response flow ## 7. Implementation Timeline - Authentication system implementation - WASM integrity enforcement - Password security enhancement - Basic monitoring setup - Data integrity verification - Signature security improvements - Input validation enhancements - Concurrent access protection - Comprehensive monitoring implementation - Advanced security controls - Performance optimization - External security audit preparation - Compliance framework implementation - Advanced threat protection - HSM integration - Comprehensive testing and validation ## 8. Compliance and Standards Assessment ### 8.1 Current Compliance Status ❌ Multiple violations identified ❌ Partial implementation ❌ Insufficient security controls ❌ Not compliant ### 8.2 Recommended Standards Implementation 1. Implement OWASP secure coding practices 2. Adopt NIST cybersecurity framework controls 3. Prepare for SOC 2 Type II audit 4. Consider ISO 27001 certification for enterprise use ## 9. Conclusion The Sonr MPC vault system demonstrates good architectural principles and has implemented several important security improvements. However, critical vulnerabilities prevent immediate production deployment with user funds. :::note The system is suitable for testnet deployment with immediate remediation of the three critical issues identified. A comprehensive security hardening effort over 3-4 months is required before mainnet deployment with user funds is recommended. ::: :::warning **Immediate Priority:** Address the three critical vulnerabilities before any production deployment. ::: **Recommendation:** Engage a certified security firm for external audit before mainnet launch. --- **Report Prepared By:** Claude (Senior Security Auditor) **Date:** August 5, 2025 **Classification:** Confidential - Internal Use Only