659 P7 Mitigation Planning F26ca73b

Phase 7: Mitigation Planning

Type: Prescriptive Executor: LLM Knowledge: Control Sets, CWE Mitigations, ASVS

⚠️ MANDATORY OUTPUT RULES

CRITICAL: Phase 7 requires TWO outputs - a YAML data file AND a Markdown report.

Dual Output Requirement

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  PHASE 7 MUST PRODUCE TWO FILES:                                    │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                      │
│  1. DATA FILE (PRIMARY - Write First!)                              │
│     Path: .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/data/P7_mitigation_plan.yaml  │
│     Purpose: Structured mitigation data for P8 to read              │
│     Format: Valid YAML with schema_version: "3.0.0 (20260201a)"                   │
│                                                                      │
│  2. REPORT FILE (SECONDARY - Write After Data!)                     │
│     Path: .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/reports/P7-MITIGATION-PLAN.md │
│     Purpose: Human-readable mitigation roadmap                      │
│     Format: Markdown with code examples and timelines               │
│                                                                      │
│  INPUT REQUIREMENT:                                                  │
│     Read: .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/data/P6_validated_risks.yaml  │
│     ❌ DO NOT read previous .md reports for data extraction         │
│     ✅ REQUIRED: Parse YAML files for validated_risks               │
│                                                                      │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Required Data Sections in YAML

Validation Gate

Phase 7 CANNOT complete until:

1. .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/data/P7_mitigation_plan.yaml exists and is valid YAML
2. Every validated risk (VR-xxx) has corresponding mitigation (MIT-xxx)
3. Implementation steps are specific (not generic)
4. .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/reports/P7-MITIGATION-PLAN.md exists

Error Handling

Fallback Strategy: If specific implementation cannot be determined due to missing code context, mark mitigation with implementation_level: guidance and provide general security principles.

Input Context

← P6: validated_risks from .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/data/P6_validated_risks.yaml

⚠️ MANDATORY: Query P6 Data Before Planning

Before starting P7 mitigation planning, LLM MUST execute these queries to obtain P6 validated risks:

# Step 1: Get P6 risk summary for overview
python scripts/phase_data.py --query --phase 6 --summary --root {PROJECT_ROOT}

# Step 2: Get detailed validated risks (PRIMARY input)
python scripts/phase_data.py --query --phase 6 --type risks --root {PROJECT_ROOT}

# Step 3: Verify P6 coverage for completeness
python scripts/phase_data.py --verify-p6-coverage --root {PROJECT_ROOT}

Or read YAML directly:

# PRIMARY source - REQUIRED
cat .phase_working/{SESSION_ID}/data/P6_validated_risks.yaml

CRITICAL: Every VR-xxx in P6 MUST have a corresponding MIT-xxx mitigation!

∀ VR-xxx ∈ P6.validated_risks → ∃ MIT-xxx ∈ P7.mitigation_plan

Do NOT plan mitigations from memory. MUST read P6 validated risks first!

Output Context

→ P8: mitigation_plan {mitigations[], roadmap{}}

Core Analysis Goal

Design specific mitigation measures and implementation plans for each validated risk. Focus on actionable, tech-stack-specific remediation that developers can implement.

Knowledge Reference

Query Commands:

$SKILL_PATH/kb --cwe CWE-89 --mitigations      # CWE-specific mitigations
$SKILL_PATH/kb --control authentication         # Security control details
$SKILL_PATH/kb --asvs-level L2                  # ASVS requirements
$SKILL_PATH/kb --asvs-chapter V4                # ASVS by chapter
$SKILL_PATH/kb --wstg V1                        # OWASP WSTG tests

KB Mitigation Sources (MANDATORY per GAP-4 Contract)

CRITICAL: P7 MUST query KB for mitigation guidance per KBQueryContract in assets/contracts/data-model.yaml

Required Queries per Risk:

1. --cwe CWE-{NNN} --mitigations - For each risk's related_cwe
2. --asvs-level {L1|L2|L3} - For verification requirements
3. --control {domain} - For implementation guidance

# In P7_mitigation_plan.yaml - MANDATORY section (GAP-4 Contract)
kb_mitigation_sources:
  # Query record
  queries_made:
    - query: "--cwe CWE-287 --mitigations"
      timestamp: "2026-01-31T14:30:00Z"
      result_count: 8
      usage: "Informed MIT-001 implementation steps"
      mitigations_informed: [MIT-001, MIT-002]
    - query: "--asvs-level L2"
      timestamp: "2026-01-31T14:30:15Z"
      result_count: 286
      usage: "Populated verification.asvs_requirement fields"
      mitigations_informed: [MIT-001, MIT-002, MIT-003]
    - query: "--control authentication"
      timestamp: "2026-01-31T14:30:30Z"
      result_count: 15
      usage: "Detailed implementation guidance for auth controls"
      mitigations_informed: [MIT-001]

  # Source tracking per mitigation
  mitigation_kb_refs:
    - mitigation_id: MIT-001
      cwe_ref: CWE-287
      cwe_mitigations_applied: ["Use multi-factor authentication", "Implement secure session management"]
      asvs_requirement: "V2.1.1"
      control_guidance: "control-set-01"
    - mitigation_id: MIT-002
      cwe_ref: CWE-89
      cwe_mitigations_applied: ["Use parameterized queries", "Apply input validation"]
      asvs_requirement: "V5.3.4"
      control_guidance: "control-set-03"

  # Coverage metrics (MANDATORY)
  coverage:
    total_mitigations: 25
    cwes_with_mitigations: 22       # Mitigations with CWE --mitigations query
    asvs_requirements_mapped: 20    # Mitigations with ASVS refs
    control_guidance_applied: 18    # Mitigations with control refs
    p0_p1_mitigations_total: 8
    p0_p1_with_kb_ref: 8            # MUST be 100% - ERROR if not
    mitigation_kb_coverage: 88.0    # cwes_with_mitigations / total_mitigations

  # Error handling
  errors:
    - query: "--cwe CWE-9999 --mitigations"
      error_type: "not_found"
      action_taken: "Used general CWE category mitigations"
      affected_mitigations: [MIT-015]

  kb_available: true

Validation Rules (GAP-4 Contract):

• ERROR: P0/P1 mitigation without any KB reference (p0_p1_with_kb_ref < p0_p1_mitigations_total)
• WARNING: mitigation_kb_coverage < 70%
• INFO: Generic mitigations should reference control guidance even if CWE-specific unavailable

Mitigation Priority Framework

Mitigation Structure

mitigation_plan:
  mitigations:
    - id: MIT-001
      title: "Enable JWT Signature Verification"
      risk_refs: [VR-001]                  # MANDATORY: Link to risks
      threat_refs: [T-S-P-001-001, T-E-P-001-002]
      priority: P0
      effort: LOW                          # LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH
      implementation_time: "2 hours"

      # Current State
      current_implementation: |
        jwt.decode(token, options={"verify_signature": False})

      # Recommended Fix
      recommended_fix: |
        # Use proper secret key from environment
        secret_key = os.environ.get('JWT_SECRET_KEY')
        jwt.decode(token, secret_key, algorithms=['HS256'])

      # Detailed Implementation
      implementation_steps:
        - step: 1
          action: "Generate secure JWT secret"
          code: |
            # Generate 256-bit random key
            openssl rand -base64 32 > jwt_secret.txt

        - step: 2
          action: "Store secret in environment"
          code: |
            # .env file
            JWT_SECRET_KEY=<generated-key>

        - step: 3
          action: "Update token verification"
          file: "src/api/auth.py"
          line: 45
          before: |
            def verify_token(token):
                return jwt.decode(token, options={"verify_signature": False})
          after: |
            def verify_token(token):
                secret_key = os.environ.get('JWT_SECRET_KEY')
                if not secret_key:
                    raise ValueError("JWT_SECRET_KEY not configured")
                return jwt.decode(token, secret_key, algorithms=['HS256'])

        - step: 4
          action: "Add unit test"
          code: |
            def test_token_verification_rejects_invalid_signature():
                invalid_token = jwt.encode(
                    {"user_id": "admin"},
                    "wrong_key",
                    algorithm="HS256"
                )
                with pytest.raises(jwt.InvalidSignatureError):
                    verify_token(invalid_token)

      # Verification
      verification:
        test_cases:
          - "Verify valid token is accepted"
          - "Verify invalid signature is rejected"
          - "Verify tampered payload is rejected"
        asvs_requirement: "V3.5.3"
        wstg_test: "WSTG-ATHN-04"

      # Security Controls Applied
      security_controls:
        - control: "Cryptographic verification"
          domain: CRYPTO
        - control: "Authentication token validation"
          domain: AUTHN

      # Additional Recommendations
      additional_recommendations:
        - "Consider using asymmetric keys (RS256) for better key management"
        - "Implement token refresh mechanism"
        - "Add token revocation support"

Mitigation Categories

Code Fixes

Direct code modifications to remediate vulnerabilities:

code_fix:
  file: "src/api/auth.py"
  function: "verify_token"
  line_range: "45-50"
  fix_type: security_patch
  before: |
    # Vulnerable code
  after: |
    # Fixed code
  test: |
    # Verification test

Configuration Changes

Security configuration updates:

config_change:
  file: ".env.example"
  setting: "JWT_SECRET_KEY"
  current: "not set"
  recommended: "256-bit random key"
  impact: "All JWT operations"

Infrastructure Changes

Infrastructure-level mitigations:

infra_change:
  component: "API Gateway"
  change: "Enable WAF rate limiting"
  config: |
    # nginx rate limiting
    limit_req_zone $binary_remote_addr zone=api:10m rate=10r/s;
    limit_req zone=api burst=20 nodelay;

Process Changes

Operational/process improvements:

process_change:
  type: "Security policy"
  description: "Implement code review for auth changes"
  implementation: "Require security team review for auth/* files"

Roadmap Structure

roadmap:
  immediate:                    # P0 - Do now
    - MIT-001: "Enable JWT verification"
    - MIT-002: "Patch SQL injection"
    timeline: "Within 24 hours"
    owner: "Security Team"

  short_term:                   # P1 - This week
    - MIT-003: "Implement rate limiting"
    - MIT-004: "Add input validation"
    timeline: "7 days"
    owner: "Backend Team"

  medium_term:                  # P2 - This month
    - MIT-005: "Add MFA support"
    - MIT-006: "Implement audit logging"
    timeline: "30 days"
    owner: "Platform Team"

  long_term:                    # P3 - Backlog
    - MIT-007: "Security architecture review"
    - MIT-008: "Penetration testing program"
    timeline: "Q2 planning"
    owner: "Security Team"

Report Template

# P7: Mitigation Planning

## Executive Summary

| Priority | Count | Timeline |
|----------|-------|----------|
| P0 (Critical) | N | Immediate |
| P1 (High) | N | 24-48h |
| P2 (Medium) | N | 7 days |
| P3 (Low) | N | 30 days |

## Immediate Actions (P0)

### MIT-001: Enable JWT Signature Verification

**Risk**: VR-001 - JWT Bypass (CVSS 9.8)
**Effort**: LOW
**Timeline**: 2 hours

**Current Implementation**:
```python
jwt.decode(token, options={"verify_signature": False})

Recommended Fix:

secret_key = os.environ.get('JWT_SECRET_KEY')
jwt.decode(token, secret_key, algorithms=['HS256'])

Implementation Steps:

1. Generate secure secret key
2. Store in environment variables
3. Update verify_token function
4. Add unit tests

Verification:

• Valid tokens accepted
• Invalid signatures rejected
• ASVS V3.5.3 compliance

Short-Term Actions (P1)

MIT-002: ...

Implementation Roadmap

Mitigation Plan

[yaml:mitigation_plan block]

---

## Quality Requirements

### Every Mitigation Must Include:

1. **risk_refs[]**: Link to VR-xxx from Phase 6
2. **Priority**: P0/P1/P2/P3
3. **Implementation Steps**: Actionable code/config changes
4. **Verification**: How to confirm fix works
5. **ASVS/WSTG References**: Compliance mapping

### Avoid Generic Recommendations

**Bad Example**:

"Implement proper input validation"

**Good Example**:
```python
# src/api/routes.py line 120
# Before:
query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = '{user_input}'"

# After:
query = "SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = %s"
cursor.execute(query, (user_input,))

Validation Gates

Completion Checklist

Before marking Phase 7 complete:

• Every VR-xxx has corresponding MIT-xxx
• yaml:mitigation_plan present
• Roadmap with timeline defined
• Implementation steps are specific (not generic)
• Code examples provided for code fixes
• Verification steps defined
• Validation passed

End of Phase 7 Instructions (~250 lines, ~2K tokens)