Attack overview DNS

Attack tree

This attack tree explores the methods to undermine BGPsec, targeting its cryptographic core, trust infrastructure, and operational complexities. From exploiting algorithmic weaknesses and compromising key storage to leveraging partial adoption and AI-enhanced attacks, this framework reveals how the very mechanisms intended to secure global routing can be subverted to orchestrate sophisticated hijacks and undermine network trust at scale.

1. Compromise BGPsec Validation [OR]

    1.1 Exploit Cryptographic Weaknesses [OR]
    
        1.1.1 Algorithm Vulnerabilities [OR]
            1.1.1.1 ECDSA with biased nonces (key recovery)
            1.1.1.2 RSA with weak key generation (ROBOT-style)
            1.1.1.3 Hash function collisions (SHA-1/256 issues)
            
        1.1.2 Implementation Flaws [OR]
            1.1.2.1 Non-constant-time implementations (timing attacks)
            1.1.2.2 Memory corruption in crypto libraries (CVE-2022-3602)
            1.1.2.3 Side-channel leaks (Minerva, Power analysis)
            
        1.1.3 Post-Quantum Threats [OR]
            1.1.3.1 Harvest now, decrypt later (quantum harvesting)
            1.1.3.2 Weak hybrid transition implementations
            1.1.3.3 Shor's algorithm preparation attacks

    1.2 Key Management Compromise [OR]
    
        1.2.1 Private Key Theft [OR]
            1.2.1.1 HSM vulnerabilities (CVE-2021-XXX)
            1.2.1.2 Supply chain backdoors in key generation
            1.2.1.3 Cloud HSM misconfigurations
            
        1.2.2 Key Rotation Failures [OR]
            1.2.2.1 Delayed key revocation propagation
            1.2.2.2 Weak key rotation policies
            1.2.2.3 Compromised key history retention
            
        1.2.3 Certificate Validation Bypass [OR]
            1.2.3.1 Rogue CA compromise for BGPsec certificates
            1.2.3.2 Certificate transparency log poisoning
            1.2.3.3 Trust anchor manipulation

    1.3 Protocol Implementation Attacks [OR]
    
        1.3.1 BGPsec Stack Vulnerabilities [OR]
            1.3.1.1 Memory corruption in BGPsec implementations
            1.3.1.2 Resource exhaustion attacks
            1.3.1.3 Parser differential attacks
            
        1.3.2 Validation Bypass [OR]
            1.3.2.1 Signature verification short-circuiting
            1.3.2.2 Cache poisoning attacks
            1.3.2.3 Time-of-check-time-of-use (TOCTOU) flaws
            
        1.3.3 Downgrade Attacks [OR]
            1.3.3.1 BGPsec capability negotiation manipulation
            1.3.3.2 Fallback to unsigned BGP sessions
            1.3.3.3 Version negotiation exploits

2. Attack BGPsec Infrastructure [OR]

    2.1 Trust Anchor Compromise [OR]
    
        2.1.1 Trust Distribution Attacks [OR]
            2.1.1.1 Malicious TAL (Trust Anchor Locator) distribution
            2.1.1.2 Package mirror compromise for validator software
            2.1.1.3 DNS poisoning for trust anchor retrieval
            
        2.1.2 Anchor Maintenance Exploits [OR]
            2.1.2.1 Delayed anchor revocation propagation
            2.1.2.2 Weak anchor rotation procedures
            2.1.2.3 Historical anchor abuse
            
        2.1.3 Cross-Protocol Trust Collisions [OR]
            2.1.3.1 RPKI-BGPsec trust chain conflicts
            2.1.3.2 TLS-BGPsec certificate trust confusion
            2.1.3.3 Shared HSM compromise across protocols

    2.2 Validator Infrastructure Attacks [OR]
    
        2.2.1 Software Vulnerabilities [OR]
            2.2.1.1 Memory safety issues in validators (Rust/C++)
            2.2.1.2 Logic flaws in path validation
            2.2.1.3 Denial-of-service through resource exhaustion
            
        2.2.2 Cache Poisoning [OR]
            2.2.2.1 Stale data attacks during sync intervals
            2.2.2.2 MITM attacks on validator-to-repository communication
            2.2.2.3 Repository compromise with malicious data
            
        2.2.3 Configuration Manipulation [OR]
            2.2.3.1 Admin interface compromises
            2.2.3.2 Misconfigured trust boundaries
            2.2.3.3 Weak access controls on validator systems

    2.3 Network Infrastructure Targeting [OR]
    
        2.3.1 Routing Table Poisoning [OR]
            2.3.1.1 Injection of malicious BGPsec paths
            2.3.1.2 Withdrawal of valid BGPsec routes
            2.3.1.3 Route flap attacks with signed updates
            
        2.3.2 Peer Session Compromise [OR]
            2.3.2.1 TCP-AO/MD5 bypass for BGP sessions
            2.3.2.2 Session reset attacks during key rotation
            2.3.2.3 MITM on BGPsec peer connections
            
        2.3.3 Resource Exhaustion [OR]
            2.3.3.1 CPU exhaustion through complex signature validation
            2.3.3.2 Memory exhaustion via large BGPsec updates
            2.3.3.3 Storage exhaustion from key history retention

3. Exploit Operational Weaknesses [OR]

    3.1 Partial Deployment Exploitation [OR]
    
        3.1.1 Validation Gap Attacks [OR]
            3.1.1.1 Route leaks through non-BGPsec ASes
            3.1.1.2 Mixed validation policy exploitation
            3.1.1.3 Border router misconfiguration
            
        3.1.2 Policy Inconsistency [OR]
            3.1.2.1 Differing local validation policies
            3.1.2.2 Conflict between RPKI and BGPsec validation
            3.1.2.3 Graceful restart compatibility issues
            
        3.1.3 Transition Period Attacks [OR]
            3.1.3.1 Exploitation during protocol migration
            3.1.3.2 Backward compatibility weaknesses
            3.1.3.3 Dual-stack (IPv4/IPv6) implementation gaps

    3.2 Human Factor Exploitation [OR]
    
        3.2.1 Social Engineering [OR]
            3.2.1.1 Operator credential theft
            3.2.1.2 Fake security alert social engineering
            3.2.1.3 Supply chain impersonation attacks
            
        3.2.2 Configuration Errors [OR]
            3.2.2.1 Weak signature policy configuration
            3.2.2.2 Incorrect trust anchor deployment
            3.2.2.3 Key management policy mistakes
            
        3.2.3 Monitoring Gaps [OR]
            3.2.3.1 Delayed attack detection
            3.2.3.2 False sense of security from partial deployment
            3.2.3.3 Lack of BGPsec-specific monitoring

    3.3 Economic and Coordination Attacks [OR]
    
        3.3.1 Resource Asymmetry Exploitation [OR]
            3.3.1.1 CPU-intensive signature attacks on smaller ASes
            3.3.1.2 Storage exhaustion through key history attacks
            3.3.1.3 Bandwidth consumption via BGPsec update floods
            
        3.3.2 Governance Attacks [OR]
            3.3.2.1 Policy registry manipulation
            3.3.2.2 Standards body influence operations
            3.3.2.3 Certification authority lobbying
            
        3.3.3 Timing and Persistence [OR]
            3.3.3.1 Long-term key compromise persistence
            3.3.3.2 Attack synchronization across multiple ASes
            3.3.3.3 Holiday/weekend attack timing

4. Cross-Protocol Attack Vectors [OR]

    4.1 RPKI-BGPsec Integration Attacks [OR]
    
        4.1.1 Validation Conflict Exploitation [OR]
            4.1.1.1 RPKI-valid but BGPsec-invalid route injection
            4.1.1.2 BGPsec-valid but RPKI-invalid path propagation
            4.1.1.3 Unknown state handling discrepancies
            
        4.1.2 Timing Attack Coordination [OR]
            4.1.2.1 Different cache TTL exploitation
            4.1.2.2 Revocation propagation timing gaps
            4.1.2.3 Validation frequency mismatches
            
        4.1.3 Trust Chain Collisions [OR]
            4.1.3.1 Shared CA compromise effects
            4.1.3.2 Different crypto algorithm support
            4.1.3.3 Protocol version compatibility issues

    4.2 TLS-BGPsec Attack Chains [OR]
    
        4.2.1 Certificate Trust Exploitation [OR]
            4.2.1.1 Cross-protocol certificate reuse attacks
            4.2.1.2 CA compromise affecting both TLS and BGPsec
            4.2.1.3 Validation policy conflict exploitation
            
        4.2.2 Session Handling Attacks [OR]
            4.2.2.1 TLS session compromise affecting BGPsec
            4.2.2.2 BGPsec key exposure affecting TLS sessions
            4.2.2.3 Cross-protocol side-channel attacks
            
        4.2.3 Implementation Shared Code [OR]
            4.2.3.1 Common crypto library vulnerabilities
            4.2.3.2 Shared memory safety issues
            4.2.3.3 Cross-protocol resource exhaustion

    4.3 Network Layer Integration Attacks [OR]
    
        4.3.1 IP Layer Exploitation [OR]
            4.3.1.1 Fragmentation attacks affecting BGPsec
            4.3.1.2 TTL-based attacks on validation
            4.3.1.3 DSCP priority manipulation
            
        4.3.2 Transport Layer Attacks [OR]
            4.3.2.1 TCP session manipulation affecting BGPsec
            4.3.2.2 QUIC protocol interaction issues
            4.3.2.3 UDP-based amplification attacks
            
        4.3.3 Application Layer Integration [OR]
            4.3.3.1 HTTP-based validator API attacks
            4.3.3.2 DNS dependencies for trust anchor resolution
            4.3.3.3 NTP timing attacks on signature validation

5. Advanced Persistent Threat Techniques [OR]

    5.1 Long-Term Key Compromise [OR]
    
        5.1.1 Supply Chain Attacks [OR]
            5.1.1.1 Hardware backdoors in crypto accelerators
            5.1.1.2 Compromised software distributions
            5.1.1.3 Malicious contributor code injections
            
        5.1.2 Key Generation Weaknesses [OR]
            5.1.2.1 Weak entropy sources during key generation
            5.1.2.2 Algorithm-specific bias introduction
            5.1.2.3 Compromised random number generators
            
        5.1.3 Key Storage Compromise [OR]
            5.1.3.1 Cold storage extraction techniques
            5.1.3.2 Cloud HSM configuration breaches
            5.1.3.3 Multi-party computation failures

    5.2 Stealthy Validation Manipulation [OR]
    
        5.2.1 Low-and-Slow Attacks [OR]
            5.2.1.1 Subtle signature validation corruption
            5.2.1.2 Gradual trust anchor manipulation
            5.2.1.3 Incremental policy modification
            
        5.2.2 False Flag Operations [OR]
            5.2.2.1 Attribution obfuscation through intermediate ASes
            5.2.2.2 Victim fingerprint spoofing
            5.2.2.3 Third-party tool exploitation
            
        5.2.3 Persistence Mechanisms [OR]
            5.2.3.1 Reinfection capabilities
            5.2.3.2 Multiple compromise vectors
            5.2.3.3 Anti-forensic techniques

    5.3 AI-Enhanced BGPsec Attacks [OR]
    
        5.3.1 Machine Learning Exploitation [OR]
            5.3.1.1 AI-generated optimal attack timing
            5.3.1.2 Neural network-based evasion patterns
            5.3.1.3 Reinforcement learning for policy exploitation
            
        5.3.2 Automated Vulnerability Discovery [OR]
            5.3.2.1 AI-assisted fuzz testing for BGPsec
            5.3.2.2 Machine learning for side-channel detection
            5.3.2.3 Automated exploit generation
            
        5.3.3 Adaptive Attack Systems [OR]
            5.3.3.1 Self-modifying attack code
            5.3.3.2 Dynamic protocol manipulation
            5.3.3.3 Intelligent countermeasure evasion

Nitty gritty risk table

Certainly. Following the same 3rd-level risk assessment framework, we can evaluate each attack path in your BGPsec attack tree. I will assign Technical Complexity, Resources Required, and a derived Risk Level (Low / Medium / High / Very High), along with short notes.

Attack Path

Technical Complexity

Resources Required

Risk Level

Notes

1.1.1.1 ECDSA with biased nonces (key recovery)

Very High

High

Very High

Requires advanced crypto knowledge and access to signatures.

1.1.1.2 RSA with weak key generation (ROBOT-style)

High

Medium

High

Exploit weakly generated keys; complex but feasible.

1.1.1.3 Hash function collisions (SHA-1/256 issues)

Very High

High

Very High

Requires computationally expensive collision attacks.

1.1.2.1 Non-constant-time implementations (timing attacks)

High

Medium

High

Side-channel exploitation; requires precision measurements.

1.1.2.2 Memory corruption in crypto libraries

Very High

Medium

Very High

Needs vulnerability discovery and exploitation skill.

1.1.2.3 Side-channel leaks (Minerva, Power analysis)

Very High

High

Very High

Requires lab-grade equipment and long-term analysis.

1.1.3.1 Harvest now, decrypt later (quantum harvesting)

Very High

High

Very High

Forward-looking threat; access to encrypted traffic over time.

1.1.3.2 Weak hybrid transition implementations

High

Medium

High

Exploits transitional crypto; moderate resources.

1.1.3.3 Shor’s algorithm preparation attacks

Very High

Very High

Very High

Future quantum attack; technically extreme.

1.2.1.1 HSM vulnerabilities

Very High

Medium

Very High

Attacks require specialized hardware and insider knowledge.

1.2.1.2 Supply chain backdoors in key generation

Very High

High

Very High

Sophisticated supply chain compromise; long-term planning.

1.2.1.3 Cloud HSM misconfigurations

High

Medium

High

Opportunistic but requires network/cloud access.

1.2.2.1 Delayed key revocation propagation

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploit time gaps; moderate impact.

1.2.2.2 Weak key rotation policies

Medium

Low

Medium

Policy misconfigurations; easy but detectable.

1.2.2.3 Compromised key history retention

High

Medium

High

Requires access to historical keys or storage.

1.2.3.1 Rogue CA compromise for BGPsec certificates

Very High

High

Very High

High-impact attack; targets trust infrastructure.

1.2.3.2 Certificate transparency log poisoning

Very High

Medium

Very High

Requires log manipulation; advanced.

1.2.3.3 Trust anchor manipulation

High

Medium

High

Impacts BGPsec validation globally; technically advanced.

1.3.1.1 Memory corruption in BGPsec implementations

Very High

Medium

Very High

Exploit stack vulnerabilities; sophisticated.

1.3.1.2 Resource exhaustion attacks

High

Medium

High

Denial-of-service via signature validation.

1.3.1.3 Parser differential attacks

High

Medium

High

Requires protocol fuzzing and vulnerability discovery.

1.3.2.1 Signature verification short-circuiting

Very High

Medium

Very High

Bypasses core validation; highly technical.

1.3.2.2 Cache poisoning attacks

High

Medium

High

Requires targeted injection; advanced skill.

1.3.2.3 TOCTOU flaws

High

Medium

High

Exploits timing between validation and use.

1.3.3.1 Capability negotiation manipulation

High

Medium

High

Needs session-level knowledge; moderate resources.

1.3.3.2 Fallback to unsigned BGP sessions

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic; relies on partial deployment.

1.3.3.3 Version negotiation exploits

High

Medium

High

Targets protocol version logic; technical.

2.1.1.1 Malicious TAL distribution

High

Medium

High

Affects trust distribution; requires access/control of channels.

2.1.1.2 Package mirror compromise

High

Medium

High

Manipulates validator software; technical and targeted.

2.1.1.3 DNS poisoning for trust anchor retrieval

Medium

Low

Medium

Classic attack vector; moderate impact.

2.1.2.1 Delayed anchor revocation propagation

Medium

Low

Medium

Timing attack; low resource.

2.1.2.2 Weak anchor rotation procedures

Medium

Low

Medium

Policy misconfiguration; detectable.

2.1.2.3 Historical anchor abuse

High

Medium

High

Requires access to old anchors; advanced.

2.1.3.1 RPKI-BGPsec trust chain conflicts

High

Medium

High

Exploits protocol inconsistencies; technical skill needed.

2.1.3.2 TLS-BGPsec certificate trust confusion

High

Medium

High

Cross-protocol attack; requires access to certs.

2.1.3.3 Shared HSM compromise

Very High

High

Very High

Infrastructure-level compromise; advanced.

2.2.1.1 Memory safety issues in validators

Very High

Medium

Very High

Vulnerability exploitation in validator software.

2.2.1.2 Logic flaws in path validation

High

Medium

High

Complex logic exploitation; advanced skill.

2.2.1.3 DoS via resource exhaustion

High

Medium

High

Moderate-to-high impact; network load intensive.

2.2.2.1 Stale data attacks during sync intervals

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic; timing attack.

2.2.2.2 MITM attacks on validator-repo communication

Very High

Medium

Very High

Requires man-in-the-middle access; highly technical.

2.2.2.3 Repository compromise with malicious data

Very High

High

Very High

Supply chain-style attack; very impactful.

2.2.3.1 Admin interface compromises

High

Medium

High

Requires privileged access; moderate complexity.

2.2.3.2 Misconfigured trust boundaries

Medium

Low

Medium

Policy misconfiguration; detectable.

2.2.3.3 Weak access controls on validator systems

Medium

Low

Medium

Easy to exploit if present.

2.3.1.1 Injection of malicious BGPsec paths

High

Medium

High

Network-level attack; needs protocol knowledge.

2.3.1.2 Withdrawal of valid BGPsec routes

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic; moderate skill.

2.3.1.3 Route flap attacks with signed updates

High

Medium

High

Requires careful timing; disruptive.

2.3.2.1 TCP-AO/MD5 bypass for BGP sessions

Very High

High

Very High

Requires privileged position or MITM.

2.3.2.2 Session reset attacks during key rotation

High

Medium

High

Timing-sensitive; requires control over sessions.

2.3.2.3 MITM on BGPsec peer connections

Very High

High

Very High

Advanced network-level attack; very technical.

2.3.3.1 CPU exhaustion through signature validation

Medium

Medium

Medium

Resource-heavy attack; detectable.

2.3.3.2 Memory exhaustion via large updates

Medium

Medium

Medium

Moderate resource usage; network impact.

2.3.3.3 Storage exhaustion from key history

Medium

Medium

Medium

Requires volume of historical keys; moderate skill.

3.1.1.1 Route leaks through non-BGPsec ASes

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits partial deployment; opportunistic.

3.1.1.2 Mixed validation policy exploitation

Medium

Low

Medium

Requires knowledge of adjacent AS policies.

3.1.1.3 Border router misconfiguration

Low

Low

Medium

Easy to detect and fix; opportunistic.

3.1.2.1 Differing local validation policies

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits inconsistent policy; moderate impact.

3.1.2.2 Conflict between RPKI and BGPsec validation

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic misalignment exploitation.

3.1.2.3 Graceful restart compatibility issues

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits operational quirks; low-resource.

3.1.3.1 Exploitation during protocol migration

Medium

Medium

Medium

Timing-dependent; requires some coordination.

3.1.3.2 Backward compatibility weaknesses

Medium

Medium

Medium

Moderate technical knowledge needed.

3.1.3.3 Dual-stack implementation gaps

Medium

Medium

Medium

IPv4/IPv6 gaps; moderately technical.

3.2.1.1 Operator credential theft

Medium

Low

Medium

Classic social engineering.

3.2.1.2 Fake security alert social engineering

Medium

Low

Medium

Phishing-style attack.

3.2.1.3 Supply chain impersonation attacks

High

Medium

High

Requires planning and insider knowledge.

3.2.2.1 Weak signature policy configuration

Medium

Low

Medium

Misconfiguration; easy to exploit.

3.2.2.2 Incorrect trust anchor deployment

Medium

Low

Medium

Configuration error; moderate impact.

3.2.2.3 Key management policy mistakes

Medium

Low

Medium

Policy-based attack; detectable.

3.2.3.1 Delayed attack detection

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits monitoring gaps; low-resource.

3.2.3.2 False sense of security from partial deployment

Medium

Low

Medium

Human factor; opportunistic.

3.2.3.3 Lack of BGPsec-specific monitoring

Medium

Low

Medium

Detection gap exploitation.

3.3.1.1 CPU-intensive signature attacks on smaller ASes

Medium

Medium

Medium

Exploits resource asymmetry.

3.3.1.2 Storage exhaustion through key history attacks

Medium

Medium

Medium

Moderate resource attack.

3.3.1.3 Bandwidth consumption via update floods

Medium

Medium

Medium

Network-heavy attack; detectable.

3.3.2.1 Policy registry manipulation

High

Medium

High

Governance-level attack; requires insider knowledge.

3.3.2.2 Standards body influence operations

High

Medium

High

Long-term, low-technical but high-impact.

3.3.2.3 Certification authority lobbying

High

Medium

High

Social/political attack vector.

3.3.3.1 Long-term key compromise persistence

Very High

High

Very High

Requires patience, access, and operational security.

3.3.3.2 Attack synchronization across multiple ASes

High

High

Very High

Complex coordination; high technical skill.

3.3.3.3 Holiday/weekend attack timing

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic; low-resource.

4.1.1.1 RPKI-valid but BGPsec-invalid route injection

High

Medium

High

Exploits cross-protocol validation gaps.

4.1.1.2 BGPsec-valid but RPKI-invalid path propagation

High

Medium

High

Cross-protocol discrepancy; advanced.

4.1.1.3 Unknown state handling discrepancies

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic; low resource.

4.1.2.1 Different cache TTL exploitation

Medium

Low

Medium

Timing attack on cache; low-resource.

4.1.2.2 Revocation propagation timing gaps

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits operational timing; moderate impact.

4.1.2.3 Validation frequency mismatches

Medium

Low

Medium

Timing/monitoring mismatch exploitation.

4.1.3.1 Shared CA compromise effects

Very High

High

Very High

Infrastructure-level cross-protocol compromise.

4.1.3.2 Different crypto algorithm support

Medium

Low

Medium

Protocol mismatch exploitation; low-resource.

4.1.3.3 Protocol version compatibility issues

Medium

Low

Medium

Operational gap exploitation.

4.2.1.1 Cross-protocol certificate reuse attacks

Very High

High

Very High

Affects TLS and BGPsec; high technical skill.

4.2.1.2 CA compromise affecting both TLS and BGPsec

Very High

High

Very High

Infrastructure-level compromise.

4.2.1.3 Validation policy conflict exploitation

High

Medium

High

Policy-based attack; technical.

4.2.2.1 TLS session compromise affecting BGPsec

Very High

High

Very High

Advanced network/crypto attack.

4.2.2.2 BGPsec key exposure affecting TLS sessions

Very High

High

Very High

High-impact cross-protocol attack.

4.2.2.3 Cross-protocol side-channel attacks

Very High

High

Very High

Requires advanced analysis and monitoring.

4.2.3.1 Common crypto library vulnerabilities

High

Medium

High

Shared code; moderate difficulty.

4.2.3.2 Shared memory safety issues

High

Medium

High

Complex exploitation; technical skill needed.

4.2.3.3 Cross-protocol resource exhaustion

Medium

Medium

Medium

Opportunistic; resource-heavy.

4.3.1.1 Fragmentation attacks affecting BGPsec

Medium

Medium

Medium

Network-layer attack; moderate impact.

4.3.1.2 TTL-based attacks on validation

Medium

Low

Medium

Opportunistic timing attack.

4.3.1.3 DSCP priority manipulation

Medium

Low

Medium

Low-resource QoS manipulation.

4.3.2.1 TCP session manipulation affecting BGPsec

High

Medium

High

Requires control over TCP flows.

4.3.2.2 QUIC protocol interaction issues

High

Medium

High

Advanced; experimental attack vector.

4.3.2.3 UDP-based amplification attacks

Medium

Medium

Medium

Opportunistic DoS.

4.3.3.1 HTTP-based validator API attacks

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits API exposure; moderate skill.

4.3.3.2 DNS dependencies for trust anchor resolution

Medium

Low

Medium

Timing or poisoning attacks; low-resource.

4.3.3.3 NTP timing attacks on signature validation

Medium

Low

Medium

Exploits timing assumptions; low-resource.

5.1.1.1 Hardware backdoors in crypto accelerators

Very High

High

Very High

Supply chain compromise; advanced.

5.1.1.2 Compromised software distributions

Very High

High

Very High

High-impact supply chain attack.

5.1.1.3 Malicious contributor code injections

Very High

Medium

Very High

Insider threat; sophisticated.

5.1.2.1 Weak entropy sources during key generation

High

Medium

High

Can produce weak keys; technical skill.

5.1.2.2 Algorithm-specific bias introduction

High

Medium

High

Cryptographic manipulation; advanced.

5.1.2.3 Compromised random number generators

High

Medium

High

Targets crypto core; advanced.

5.1.3.1 Cold storage extraction techniques

Very High

High

Very High

Requires physical access; highly technical.

5.1.3.2 Cloud HSM configuration breaches

High

Medium

High

Access to misconfigured cloud HSMs; technical.

5.1.3.3 Multi-party computation failures

Very High

High

Very High

Exploits collaborative crypto; highly complex.

5.2.1.1 Subtle signature validation corruption

Very High

High

Very High

Stealthy, difficult to detect.

5.2.1.2 Gradual trust anchor manipulation

High

Medium

High

Low-and-slow attack; requires patience.

5.2.1.3 Incremental policy modification

High

Medium

High

Operational-level subtle attack.

5.2.2.1 Attribution obfuscation through intermediate ASes

High

Medium

High

Advanced false-flag operations.

5.2.2.2 Victim fingerprint spoofing

Medium

Medium

Medium

Moderate technical skill; opportunistic.

5.2.2.3 Third-party tool exploitation

Medium

Medium

Medium

Exploits available tools; moderate complexity.

5.2.3.1 Reinfection capabilities

Very High

High

Very High

Persistence mechanism; highly advanced.

5.2.3.2 Multiple compromise vectors

Very High

High

Very High

Multi-pronged, complex attack.

5.2.3.3 Anti-forensic techniques

Very High

High

Very High

Evades detection; high skill needed.

5.3.1.1 AI-generated optimal attack timing

Very High

High

Very High

Cutting-edge AI-assisted planning.

5.3.1.2 Neural network-based evasion patterns

Very High

High

Very High

Adaptive attack techniques; advanced.

5.3.1.3 Reinforcement learning for policy exploitation

Very High

High

Very High

Requires AI expertise; highly sophisticated.

5.3.2.1 AI-assisted fuzz testing for BGPsec

High

Medium

High

Speeds vulnerability discovery.

5.3.2.2 Machine learning for side-channel detection

High

Medium

High

Advanced monitoring/attack synergy.

5.3.2.3 Automated exploit generation

Very High

High

Very High

AI-driven attack creation; highly technical.

5.3.3.1 Self-modifying attack code

Very High

High

Very High

Adaptive malware; extremely advanced.

5.3.3.2 Dynamic protocol manipulation

Very High

High

Very High

Changes attack vectors on the fly; complex.

5.3.3.3 Intelligent countermeasure evasion

Very High

High

Very High

Evades detection systems; cutting-edge threat.

BGPsec heatmap

Attack Category Example Attack Path Risk Level Likely Adversary
Cryptography ECDSA with biased nonces, RSA weak keys Very High Nation-state / APT
Key Management Private key theft, weak rotation policies High Nation-state / Cybercriminal
Protocol Implementation Memory corruption, TOCTOU, downgrade attacks High Nation-state / Cybercriminal
Trust Anchor Malicious TALs, anchor rotation flaws Medium Cybercriminal / Opportunistic
Validator Infrastructure Cache poisoning, validator misconfig Medium Cybercriminal / Opportunistic
Network Infrastructure Routing table poisoning, session compromise High Nation-state / Cybercriminal
Partial Deployment Validation gaps, mixed policies Low Opportunistic
Human Factor Operator credential theft, social engineering High Nation-state / Cybercriminal
Economic / Coordination Resource asymmetry, attack timing Medium Nation-state / Cybercriminal
Cross-Protocol RPKI/BGPsec conflicts, TLS integration High Nation-state / Cybercriminal
APT / AI-Powered ML-generated attacks, adaptive persistence Very High Nation-state / APT