MetaMUI Crypto Primitives Security Policies and Procedures

Side-channel claim limit. Nothing on this page claims constant-time behaviour or side-channel resistance for any target: the side-channel harness covers nothing (finding A48) and no measurement exists. The Rust and C cores are designed for constant time and unmeasured; managed runtimes (JIT, GC, bounds checks) make no timing claim. Where this page names constant-time or side-channel techniques, in prose or in code, they are design intent or recommendations, not measured properties.

Table of Contents

1. Security Architecture
2. Threat Model
3. Key Management Policies
4. Secure Development Guidelines
5. Incident Response Procedures
6. Compliance Requirements
7. Security Audit Procedures
8. Vulnerability Disclosure Policy

Security Architecture

Core Security Principles

1. Defense in Depth: Multiple layers of security controls
2. Least Privilege: Minimal access rights for all operations
3. Zero Trust: Verify all operations, trust nothing by default
4. Secure by Default: Safe configurations out of the box
5. Fail Secure: Failures result in secure states

Cryptographic Architecture

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    Application Layer                          │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                  Security Module Interface                    │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  Post-Quantum  │  Classical  │  Utilities  │  DRBG Module   │
│  ┌──────────┐  │ ┌─────────┐ │ ┌────────┐ │ ┌────────────┐ │
│  │ ML-KEM   │  │ │Ed25519  │ │ │SHA-256 │ │ │HMAC_DRBG   │ │
│  │ Dilithium│  │ │SR25519  │ │ │BLAKE2  │ │ │SP 800-90A  │ │
│  │ Falcon   │  │ │ChaCha20 │ │ │Argon2  │ │ │RNG         │ │
│  │ NTRU     │  │ │AES-256  │ │ │HKDF    │ │ └────────────┘ │
│  └──────────┘  │ └─────────┘ │ └────────┘ │                 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│               Secure Memory Management Layer                  │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                  Hardware Security Module                     │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Security Boundaries

1. Process Isolation: Each cryptographic operation runs in isolated context
2. Memory Protection: Secure memory regions for sensitive data
3. API Boundaries: Well-defined interfaces with input validation
4. Language Boundaries: Safe FFI interfaces between implementations

Threat Model

Adversary Capabilities

We assume adversaries with the following capabilities:

1. Network Adversary
   • Can observe all network traffic
   • Can inject, modify, or delete messages
   • Cannot break properly implemented cryptographic primitives
2. System Adversary
   • May have limited access to system
   • Cannot access secure memory regions
   • Cannot modify signed code
3. Quantum Adversary
   • Has access to quantum computers
   • Can break RSA, ECDSA, and similar algorithms
   • Cannot break post-quantum algorithms

Attack Vectors

1. Cryptographic Attacks
   • Side-channel attacks (timing, power, EM)
   • Fault injection attacks
   • Nonce reuse attacks
   • Weak randomness exploitation
2. Implementation Attacks
   • Buffer overflows
   • Integer overflows
   • Use-after-free vulnerabilities
   • Race conditions
3. Protocol Attacks
   • Man-in-the-middle attacks
   • Replay attacks
   • Downgrade attacks
   • Cross-protocol attacks

Mitigations

1. Constant-Time Operations: all cryptographic operations written for constant time (design intent; not claimed, unmeasured, A48)
2. Memory Safety: Rust’s ownership system, bounds checking
3. Input Validation: Strict validation of all inputs
4. Secure Randomness: HMAC_DRBG per SP 800-90A with SP 800-90B-style health tests; not a validated FIPS 140-3 module
5. Post-Quantum Security: Quantum-resistant algorithms

Key Management Policies

Key Generation

1. Entropy Requirements
   • Minimum 256 bits of entropy for key generation
   • Use the HMAC_DRBG (SP 800-90A) generator with its health tests on; no validated FIPS 140-3 module exists in this project
   • Seed from multiple entropy sources
2. Key Strength Requirements
   • Classical: Minimum 256-bit security level
   • Post-Quantum: NIST Level 3 or higher
   • Hash functions: SHA-256 or stronger

Key Storage

1. At Rest
   • Encrypt keys using AES-256-GCM
   • Store in secure key storage (HSM when available)
   • Use key derivation for storage keys
2. In Memory
   • Use secure memory regions
   • Clear keys immediately after use
   • Implement zeroization on drop
3. Key Hierarchy

   Master Key (Hardware Protected)
        │
        ├── Key Encryption Keys (KEK)
        │   └── Data Encryption Keys (DEK)
        │
        └── Signing Keys
            └── Authentication Keys
   

Key Rotation

1. Rotation Schedule
   • Master keys: Annual rotation
   • KEKs: Quarterly rotation
   • DEKs: Monthly or after 2^32 operations
   • Nonces: Never reuse, rotate key after 2^32 uses
2. Rotation Procedures ```
   1. Generate new key with proper entropy
   2. Re-encrypt all dependent data
   3. Verify successful re-encryption
   4. Securely destroy old key
   5. Update key version metadata ```

Key Destruction

1. Zeroization Requirements
   • Overwrite memory with zeros
   • Use compiler barriers to prevent optimization
   • Verify zeroization completed
2. Destruction Triggers
   • Key expiration
   • Security incident
   • Key compromise
   • System decommission

Secure Development Guidelines

Coding Standards

1. Memory Safety

   // Good: Use safe abstractions
   let mut buffer = vec![0u8; size];
      
   // Bad: Raw pointer manipulation
   let ptr = buffer.as_mut_ptr();
   unsafe { *ptr = value; }
   

2. Error Handling

   // Good: Propagate errors
   fn process_data(input: &[u8]) -> Result<Vec<u8>, CryptoError> {
       validate_input(input)?;
       Ok(encrypt(input)?)
   }
      
   // Bad: Panic on error
   fn process_data(input: &[u8]) -> Vec<u8> {
       assert!(input.len() > 0);
       encrypt(input).unwrap()
   }
   

3. Constant-Time Operations

   // Good: Constant-time comparison
   use subtle::ConstantTimeEq;
   if expected.ct_eq(&actual).unwrap_u8() == 1 {
       // Equal
   }
      
   // Bad: Variable-time comparison
   if expected == actual {
       // Equal
   }
   

Security Testing

1. Unit Tests
   • Test all error conditions
   • Verify constant-time properties
   • Check boundary conditions
2. Integration Tests
   • Cross-language compatibility
   • Protocol compliance
   • Performance under load
3. Security Tests
   • Fuzzing with AFL/LibFuzzer
   • Static analysis with Clippy/MIRI
   • Dynamic analysis with Valgrind

Code Review Process

1. Pre-Review Checklist
   • No unsafe code without justification
   • All inputs validated
   • Errors handled properly
   • Sensitive data zeroized
   • Tests pass on all platforms
2. Review Focus Areas
   • Cryptographic correctness
   • Memory safety
   • Side-channel resistance
   • Error handling
   • API design
3. Approval Requirements
   • Minimum 2 reviewers
   • Security team approval for crypto changes
   • All CI checks passing

Incident Response Procedures

Incident Classification

1. Severity Levels
   • Critical: Active exploitation, key compromise
   • High: Vulnerability with PoC, potential key exposure
   • Medium: Theoretical vulnerability, no known exploitation
   • Low: Minor issues, defense-in-depth improvements

Response Procedures

1. Detection Phase (0-15 minutes) ```
   1. Identify incident indicators
   2. Assess initial severity
   3. Notify security team
   4. Begin incident log ```
2. Containment Phase (15-60 minutes) ```
   1. Isolate affected systems
   2. Revoke compromised credentials
   3. Block malicious activity
   4. Preserve evidence ```
3. Investigation Phase (1-24 hours) ```
   1. Analyze attack vectors
   2. Determine scope of compromise
   3. Identify root cause
   4. Document findings ```
4. Recovery Phase (1-7 days) ```
   1. Patch vulnerabilities
   2. Rotate affected keys
   3. Restore from secure backups
   4. Verify system integrity ```
5. Post-Incident Phase (1-4 weeks) ```
   1. Complete incident report
   2. Update security procedures
   3. Implement additional controls
   4. Share lessons learned ```

Communication Plan

1. Internal Communication
   • Security team: Immediate notification
   • Development team: Within 1 hour
   • Management: Within 4 hours
   • Legal team: Within 24 hours
2. External Communication
   • Users: Within 72 hours of confirmation
   • Regulators: As required by law
   • Public: Coordinated disclosure

Compliance Requirements

Standards Compliance

1. FIPS 140-3
   • Not validated: no CMVP submission exists or is claimed for this release line
   • The DRBG follows SP 800-90A with SP 800-90B-style health tests
   • Continuous self-tests
   • Audit logging
2. Common Criteria
   • EAL4+ target for security modules
   • Formal security model
   • Vulnerability analysis
   • Penetration testing
3. NIST Guidelines
   • SP 800-90B: Entropy sources
   • SP 800-133: Key generation
   • SP 800-38D: AEAD modes
   • SP 800-208: Post-quantum security

Regulatory Compliance

1. Data Protection
   • GDPR: Right to erasure, encryption
   • CCPA: Data security requirements
   • HIPAA: Healthcare data protection
   • PCI-DSS: Payment card security
2. Export Controls
   • Classify cryptographic strength
   • Document export restrictions
   • Maintain compliance records

Audit Requirements

1. Audit Logging ```
   • Key generation/destruction events
   • Authentication attempts
   • Configuration changes
   • Security incidents
   • Access to sensitive operations ```
2. Log Protection
   • Cryptographic integrity (HMAC-SHA256)
   • Secure storage
   • Retention for 1 year minimum
   • Tamper detection

Security Audit Procedures

Internal Audits

1. Quarterly Reviews
   • Code security review
   • Dependency vulnerability scan
   • Configuration audit
   • Access control review
2. Annual Assessment
   • Full security architecture review
   • Penetration testing
   • Cryptographic validation
   • Compliance verification

External Audits

1. Third-Party Assessment
   • Annual security audit by certified firm
   • Cryptographic implementation review
   • Side-channel analysis
   • Post-quantum readiness
2. Certification Audits
   • Common Criteria evaluation
   • SOC 2 Type II audit

Continuous Monitoring

1. Automated Scanning
   • Daily dependency checks
   • Weekly static analysis
   • Monthly dynamic analysis
   • Continuous fuzzing
2. Security Metrics
   • Time to patch vulnerabilities
   • Incident response times
   • Code coverage percentage
   • Security training completion

Vulnerability Disclosure Policy

Responsible Disclosure

1. Reporting Channels
   • Email: security@metamui.id
   • PGP key: [Published on website]
2. Response Timeline
   • Initial response: 24 hours
   • Severity assessment: 72 hours
   • Fix timeline: Based on severity
   • Public disclosure: 90 days

Disclosure Process

1. Reporter Guidelines
   • Provide detailed vulnerability description
   • Include proof of concept if available
   • Allow reasonable time for fixes
   • Coordinate public disclosure
2. Our Commitments
   • Acknowledge receipt promptly
   • Keep reporter informed of progress
   • Credit reporter (if desired)
   • Not pursue legal action for good-faith reports

Security Advisories

1. Advisory Format

   # Security Advisory: [CVE-YYYY-NNNNN]
      
   **Severity**: Critical/High/Medium/Low
   **Component**: Affected component
   **Versions**: Affected versions
   **Fixed in**: Version with fix
      
   ## Description
   [Detailed vulnerability description]
      
   ## Impact
   [Potential impact on users]
      
   ## Mitigation
   [Steps to mitigate if update not possible]
      
   ## References
   [Links to patches, documentation]
   

2. Distribution Channels
   • GitHub Security Advisories
   • Security mailing list
   • Project blog/website
   • Social media (for critical issues)

Security Contacts

• Security Team Lead: security@metamui.id
• Incident Response: incident@metamui.id
• Vulnerability Reports: security@metamui.id

Review Schedule

This security policy document is reviewed and updated:

• Quarterly by the security team
• Annually by external auditors
• After any major security incident
• When compliance requirements change

Last Updated: January 2025 Next Review: April 2025