JWS Validation On Mojaloop Switch: A Security Upgrade

Hey guys! Let's dive into a crucial discussion regarding the validation of JSON Web Signatures (JWS) on incoming requests within our Mojaloop switch implementation. This is super important for maintaining the integrity and security of our system, so let’s get right to it!

Request Summary

Currently, our switch implementation operates on the principle that participants are responsible for validating JWS signatures on incoming requests. However, there's a growing consensus that the switch itself should also perform this validation step before accepting any requests that involve the movement of funds. The previous thinking was that as long as both participants were correctly signing and validating signatures, the switch's involvement was unnecessary because no flows were considered vulnerable. But, we're revisiting this to ensure we're as secure as possible.

Why is this important?

In the current setup, we're essentially trusting that all participants are doing their part perfectly. But what if there's a lapse in one participant's validation process? A compromised or malicious actor could potentially exploit this, leading to unauthorized fund movements. By having the switch also validate the signatures, we add an extra layer of security – a safety net, if you will – that can catch any issues that might slip through the cracks. This proactive approach minimizes risks and protects the system's overall integrity.

The Core of the Discussion

At the heart of this discussion is a trade-off: the added security versus the potential overhead of additional validation processes. Validating JWS signatures at the switch level introduces computational costs and might slightly increase processing time for requests. However, many believe that the enhanced security far outweighs these costs. Think of it like this: it's similar to having multiple locks on your door. Each lock adds a bit of inconvenience (another key to turn), but significantly boosts your security. Similarly, switch-level validation acts as another robust safeguard against potential vulnerabilities.

Balancing Security and Performance

Of course, we need to consider the performance implications carefully. We don’t want to introduce a validation process that slows down the system to the point where it affects legitimate transactions. Therefore, the discussion isn’t just about whether to validate at the switch level, but also how to do it efficiently. We'll need to explore the best algorithms and implementation strategies to ensure minimal impact on performance. This might involve caching validated signatures, optimizing cryptographic operations, or even using hardware acceleration for signature verification. The goal is to strike a balance: maximum security with minimal performance overhead.

The Bigger Picture: Defense in Depth

This initiative fits into a broader security principle known as defense in depth. This concept emphasizes using multiple layers of security controls to protect a system. If one layer fails, others are in place to prevent a breach. By adding switch-level validation, we’re strengthening our defense-in-depth strategy, making the entire system more resilient against attacks. It's about creating a robust, multi-layered security posture that can withstand various threats.

Request Details

Key Information

• Deadline: Urgently needed – ASAP!
• Impacted Teams: Primarily the core team, with potential involvement from other teams as well.
• Impacted Components: Specifically, the ml-api-adapter component will be affected.

Accountability

• Owner: The Design Authority (DA) is taking ownership of this initiative.
• Raised By: @MichaelJBRichards brought this important issue to our attention.

Decision(s)

• Approved By: Awaiting the name of the approver to be inserted here.

Details

• [ ] The actual decision resulting from our discussion will be documented here.

Follow-up

• [ ] We'll outline the specific actions required to implement the decisions made.

Deep Dive into the Decision-Making Process

The decision to implement JWS validation at the switch level isn't taken lightly. It involves a thorough evaluation of various factors, including the potential security risks, the performance impact, and the overall complexity of implementation. The Design Authority plays a crucial role in this process, ensuring that all aspects are carefully considered before a final decision is made.

One of the key considerations is identifying the specific vulnerabilities that switch-level validation would address. This involves analyzing potential attack vectors and determining how the additional validation layer can mitigate these risks. For example, if a participant's system is compromised and starts sending fraudulent requests, the switch's validation could detect the invalid signatures and prevent the fraudulent transactions from going through.

Exploring Different Implementation Approaches

There are several ways we could implement JWS validation at the switch level, each with its own trade-offs. One approach is to validate the signature for every incoming request. This provides the highest level of security but could also have the greatest impact on performance. Another approach is to use a caching mechanism, where validated signatures are stored for a certain period. This can reduce the overhead of validation but introduces the risk of accepting a compromised signature if it was previously validated and cached. We need to analyze these options and select the one that best fits our requirements.

Engaging with the Community

This decision also has implications for the broader Mojaloop community. If we implement switch-level validation, it will affect how participants interact with the system. Therefore, it's important to communicate our plans clearly and gather feedback from the community. This ensures that everyone is aware of the changes and can adapt their systems accordingly. It also allows us to benefit from the collective expertise of the community, potentially identifying unforeseen issues or better implementation strategies.

The Role of Automated Testing

Once the decision is made and the implementation begins, rigorous testing will be essential. Automated tests can play a crucial role in ensuring that the validation process is working correctly and that it doesn't introduce any regressions or performance issues. These tests should cover various scenarios, including valid and invalid signatures, different key sizes, and different signing algorithms. This thorough testing process gives us the confidence that the new validation layer is robust and reliable.

Long-Term Maintenance and Evolution

Finally, it's important to consider the long-term maintenance and evolution of the JWS validation process. As cryptographic technologies evolve and new threats emerge, we may need to update our validation mechanisms. This requires a flexible and adaptable architecture that can accommodate future changes. It also requires ongoing monitoring and analysis to identify potential vulnerabilities and ensure that the system remains secure over time. Think of it as an ever-evolving shield against potential threats – always adapting, always improving.

Next Steps

Okay, so what happens next? We need to solidify the decision details and define the specific actions required for implementation. This includes:

1. Documenting the final decision: Clearly stating the approved approach for JWS validation at the switch level.
2. Assigning responsibilities: Identifying individuals or teams responsible for each implementation task.
3. Developing a detailed plan: Outlining the steps, timelines, and resources required for implementation.
4. Communicating with stakeholders: Informing all relevant parties about the changes and their implications.
5. Establishing a testing strategy: Defining the tests needed to ensure the validation process works correctly.

By addressing these follow-up items, we can ensure a smooth and effective implementation of JWS validation at the switch level, ultimately enhancing the security and integrity of our Mojaloop ecosystem. Let's keep this conversation going, guys, and work together to make Mojaloop even more secure!