Security and Hardening
Overview
Security-first development practices for web applications. Treat every external input as hostile, every secret as sacred, and every authorization check as mandatory. Security isn't a phase — it's a constraint on every line of code that touches user data, authentication, or external systems.
When to Use
- Building anything that accepts user input
- Implementing authentication or authorization
- Storing or transmitting sensitive data
- Integrating with external APIs or services
- Adding file uploads, webhooks, or callbacks
- Handling payment or PII data
Process: Threat Model First
Controls bolted on without a threat model are guesses. Before hardening, spend five minutes thinking like an attacker:
- Map the trust boundaries. Where does untrusted data cross into your system? HTTP requests, form fields, file uploads, webhooks, third-party APIs, message queues, and LLM output. Every boundary is attack surface.
- Name the assets. What's worth stealing or breaking? Credentials, PII, payment data, admin actions, money movement.
- Run STRIDE over each boundary — a quick lens, not a ceremony:
| Threat | Ask | Typical mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Spoofing | Can someone impersonate a user/service? | Authentication, signature verification |
| Tampering | Can data be altered in transit or at rest? | Integrity checks, parameterized queries, HTTPS |
| Repudiation | Can an action be denied later? | Audit logging of security events |
| Information disclosure | Can data leak? | Encryption, field allowlists, generic errors |
| Denial of service | Can it be overwhelmed? | Rate limiting, input size caps, timeouts |
| Elevation of privilege | Can a user gain rights they shouldn't? | Authorization checks, least privilege |
- Write abuse cases next to use cases. For each feature, ask "how would I misuse this?" — then make that your first test.
If you can't name the trust boundaries for a feature, you're not ready to secure it. This is OWASP A04: Insecure Design — most breaches begin in design, not code.
The Three-Tier Boundary System
Always Do (No Exceptions)
- Validate all external input at the system boundary (API routes, form handlers)
- Parameterize all database queries — never concatenate user input into SQL
- Encode output to prevent XSS (use framework auto-escaping, don't bypass it)
- Use HTTPS for all external communication
- Hash passwords with bcrypt/scrypt/argon2 (never store plaintext)
- Set security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options)
- Use httpOnly, secure, sameSite cookies for sessions
- Run
npm audit(or equivalent) before every release
Ask First (Requires Human Approval)
- Adding new authentication flows or changing auth logic
- Storing new categories of sensitive data (PII, payment info)
- Adding new external service integrations
- Changing CORS configuration
- Adding file upload handlers
- Modifying rate limiting or throttling
- Granting elevated permissions or roles
Never Do
- Never commit secrets to version control (API keys, passwords, tokens)
- Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, full credit card numbers)
- Never trust client-side validation as a security boundary
- Never disable security headers for convenience
- Never use
eval()orinnerHTMLwith user-provided data - Never store sessions in client-accessible storage (localStorage for auth tokens)
- Never expose stack traces or internal error details to users
OWASP Top 10 Prevention Patterns
These are prevention patterns, not a ranking. For the 2021 ordering, see the quick-reference table in references/security-checklist.md.
Injection (SQL, NoSQL, OS Command)
// BAD: SQL injection via string concatenation
const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = '${userId}'`;
// GOOD: Parameterized query
const user = await db.query('SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = $1', [userId]);
// GOOD: ORM with parameterized input
const user = await prisma.user.findUnique({ where: { id: userId } });
Broken Authentication
// Password hashing
import { hash, compare } from 'bcrypt';
const SALT_ROUNDS = 12;
const hashedPassword = await hash(plaintext, SALT_ROUNDS);
const isValid = await compare(plaintext, hashedPassword);
// Session management
app.use(session({
secret: process.env.SESSION_SECRET, // From environment, not code
resave: false,
saveUninitialized: false,
cookie: {
httpOnly: true, // Not accessible via JavaScript
secure: true, // HTTPS only
sameSite: 'lax', // CSRF protection
maxAge: 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000, // 24 hours
},
}));
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)
// BAD: Rendering user input as HTML
element.innerHTML = userInput;
// GOOD: Use framework auto-escaping (React does this by default)
return <div>{userInput}</div>;
// If you MUST render HTML, sanitize first
import DOMPurify from 'dompurify';
const clean = DOMPurify.sanitize(userInput);
Broken Access Control
// Always check authorization, not just authentication
app.patch('/api/tasks/:id', authenticate, async (req, res) => {
const task = await taskService.findById(req.params.id);
// Check that the authenticated user owns this resource
if (task.ownerId !== req.user.id) {
return res.status(403).json({
error: { code: 'FORBIDDEN', message: 'Not authorized to modify this task' }
});
}
// Proceed with update
const updated = await taskService.update(req.params.id, req.body);
return res.json(updated);
});
Security Misconfiguration
// Security headers (use helmet for Express)
import helmet from 'helmet';
app.use(helmet());
// Content Security Policy
app.use(helmet.contentSecurityPolicy({
directives: {
defaultSrc: ["'self'"],
scriptSrc: ["'self'"],
styleSrc: ["'self'", "'unsafe-inline'"], // Tighten if possible
imgSrc: ["'self'", 'data:', 'https:'],
connectSrc: ["'self'"],
},
}));
// CORS — restrict to known origins
app.use(cors({
origin: process.env.ALLOWED_ORIGINS?.split(',') || 'http://localhost:3000',
credentials: true,
}));
Sensitive Data Exposure
// Never return sensitive fields in API responses
function sanitizeUser(user: UserRecord): PublicUser {
const { passwordHash, resetToken, ...publicFields } = user;
return publicFields;
}
// Use environment variables for secrets
const API_KEY = process.env.STRIPE_API_KEY;
if (!API_KEY) throw new Error('STRIPE_API_KEY not configured');
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
Any time the server fetches a URL the user influenced — webhooks, "import from URL", image proxies, link previews — an attacker can aim it at internal services (cloud metadata, localhost, private IPs).
// BAD: fetch whatever the user gives you
await fetch(req.body.webhookUrl);
// GOOD: allowlist scheme + host, reject if ANY resolved IP is private, forbid redirects
import { lookup } from 'node:dns/promises';
import ipaddr from 'ipaddr.js';
const ALLOWED_HOSTS = new Set(['hooks.example.com']);
async function assertSafeUrl(raw: string): Promise<URL> {
const url = new URL(raw);
if (url.protocol !== 'https:') throw new Error('https only');
if (!ALLOWED_HOSTS.has(url.hostname)) throw new Error('host not allowed');
// Resolve ALL records; a single private/reserved address fails the check.
const addrs = await lookup(url.hostname, { all: true });
if (addrs.some((a) => ipaddr.parse(a.address).range() !== 'unicast')) {
throw new Error('private/reserved IP');
}
return url;
}
await fetch(await assertSafeUrl(req.body.webhookUrl), { redirect: 'error' });
The range() !== 'unicast' check covers loopback, link-local 169.254.169.254 (cloud metadata, the #1 SSRF target), private, and unique-local ranges across IPv4 and IPv6.
Caveat — this still has a TOCTOU gap. fetch resolves DNS again after the check, so an attacker using a short-TTL record can rebind to an internal IP between validation and connection. For high-risk surfaces, resolve once and connect to the pinned IP, or put a filtering agent in front (request-filtering-agent / ssrf-req-filter).
Input Validation Patterns
Schema Validation at Boundaries
import { z } from 'zod';
const CreateTaskSchema = z.object({
title: z.string().min(1).max(200).trim(),
description: z.string().max(2000).optional(),
priority: z.enum(['low', 'medium', 'high']).default('medium'),
dueDate: z.string().datetime().optional(),
});
// Validate at the route handler
app.post('/api/tasks', async (req, res) => {
const result = CreateTaskSchema.safeParse(req.body);
if (!result.success) {
return res.status(422).json({
error: {
code: 'VALIDATION_ERROR',
message: 'Invalid input',
details: result.error.flatten(),
},
});
}
// result.data is now typed and validated
const task = await taskService.create(result.data);
return res.status(201).json(task);
});
File Upload Safety
// Restrict file types and sizes
const ALLOWED_TYPES = ['image/jpeg', 'image/png', 'image/webp'];
const MAX_SIZE = 5 * 1024 * 1024; // 5MB
function validateUpload(file: UploadedFile) {
if (!ALLOWED_TYPES.includes(file.mimetype)) {
throw new ValidationError('File type not allowed');
}
if (file.size > MAX_SIZE) {
throw new ValidationError('File too large (max 5MB)');
}
// Don't trust the file extension — check magic bytes if critical
}
Triaging npm audit Results
Not all audit findings require immediate action. Use this decision tree:
npm audit reports a vulnerability
├── Severity: critical or high
│ ├── Is the vulnerable code reachable in your app?
│ │ ├── YES --> Fix immediately (update, patch, or replace the dependency)
│ │ └── NO (dev-only dep, unused code path) --> Fix soon, but not a blocker
│ └── Is a fix available?
│ ├── YES --> Update to the patched version
│ └── NO --> Check for workarounds, consider replacing the dependency, or add to allowlist with a review date
├── Severity: moderate
│ ├── Reachable in production? --> Fix in the next release cycle
│ └── Dev-only? --> Fix when convenient, track in backlog
└── Severity: low
└── Track and fix during regular dependency updates
Key questions:
- Is the vulnerable function actually called in your code path?
- Is the dependency a runtime dependency or dev-only?
- Is the vulnerability exploitable given your deployment context (e.g., a server-side vulnerability in a client-only app)?
When you defer a fix, document the reason and set a review date.
Supply-Chain Hygiene
npm audit catches known CVEs; it won't catch a malicious or typosquatted package. Also:
- Commit the lockfile and install with
npm ci(notnpm install) in CI — reproducible builds, no silent version drift. - Review new dependencies before adding them — maintenance, download counts, and whether they truly earn their place. Every dependency is attack surface (OWASP A06: Vulnerable Components, LLM03: Supply Chain).
- Be wary of
postinstallscripts in unfamiliar packages — they run arbitrary code at install time. - Watch for typosquats —
cross-envvscrossenv,react-domvsreactdom.
Rate Limiting
import rateLimit from 'express-rate-limit';
// General API rate limit
app.use('/api/', rateLimit({
windowMs: 15 * 60 * 1000, // 15 minutes
max: 100, // 100 requests per window
standardHeaders: true,
legacyHeaders: false,
}));
// Stricter limit for auth endpoints
app.use('/api/auth/', rateLimit({
windowMs: 15 * 60 * 1000,
max: 10, // 10 attempts per 15 minutes
}));
Secrets Management
.env files:
├── .env.example → Committed (template with placeholder values)
├── .env → NOT committed (contains real secrets)
└── .env.local → NOT committed (local overrides)
.gitignore must include:
.env
.env.local
.env.*.local
*.pem
*.key
Always check before committing:
# Check for accidentally staged secrets
git diff --cached | grep -i "password\|secret\|api_key\|token"
If a secret is ever committed, rotate it. Deleting the line or rewriting history is not enough — assume it's compromised the moment it reaches a remote. Revoke and reissue the key first, then purge it from history.
Securing AI / LLM Features
If your app calls an LLM — chatbots, summarizers, agents, RAG — it inherits a new attack surface. Map it to the OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications (2025):
- Treat all model output as untrusted input (LLM05: Improper Output Handling). Never pass LLM output straight into
eval, SQL, a shell,innerHTML, or a file path. Validate and encode it exactly as you would raw user input. - Assume prompts can be hijacked (LLM01: Prompt Injection). Untrusted text in the context window — a user message, a fetched web page, a PDF — can carry instructions. The system prompt is not a security boundary; enforce permissions in code, not in the prompt.
- Keep secrets and other users' data out of prompts (LLM02 / LLM07). Anything in the context can be echoed back. Don't put API keys, cross-tenant data, or the full system prompt where the model can repeat it.
- Constrain tool and agent permissions (LLM06: Excessive Agency). Scope tools to the minimum, require confirmation for destructive or irreversible actions, and validate every tool argument.
- Bound consumption (LLM10: Unbounded Consumption). Cap tokens, request rate, and loop/recursion depth so a crafted input can't run up cost or hang the system.
- Isolate retrieval data (LLM08: Vector and Embedding Weaknesses). In RAG, treat the vector store as a trust boundary: partition embeddings per tenant so one user can't retrieve another's data, and validate documents before indexing so poisoned content can't steer answers.
// BAD: trusting model output as a command or as markup
const sql = await llm.generate(`Write SQL for: ${userQuestion}`);
await db.query(sql); // arbitrary query execution
container.innerHTML = await llm.reply(userMessage); // stored XSS, via the model
// GOOD: model output is data — parse defensively, then validate, then encode
let intent;
try {
intent = CommandSchema.parse(JSON.parse(await llm.replyJson(userMessage)));
} catch {
throw new ValidationError('unexpected model output'); // JSON.parse or schema failed
}
await runAllowlistedAction(intent.action, intent.params);
container.textContent = await llm.reply(userMessage);
Security Review Checklist
### Authentication
- [ ] Passwords hashed with bcrypt/scrypt/argon2 (salt rounds ≥ 12)
- [ ] Session tokens are httpOnly, secure, sameSite
- [ ] Login has rate limiting
- [ ] Password reset tokens expire
### Authorization
- [ ] Every endpoint checks user permissions
- [ ] Users can only access their own resources
- [ ] Admin actions require admin role verification
### Input
- [ ] All user input validated at the boundary
- [ ] SQL queries are parameterized
- [ ] HTML output is encoded/escaped
- [ ] Server-side URL fetches are allowlisted (no SSRF to internal services)
### Data
- [ ] No secrets in code or version control
- [ ] Sensitive fields excluded from API responses
- [ ] PII encrypted at rest (if applicable)
### Infrastructure
- [ ] Security headers configured (CSP, HSTS, etc.)
- [ ] CORS restricted to known origins
- [ ] Dependencies audited for vulnerabilities
- [ ] Error messages don't expose internals
### Supply Chain
- [ ] Lockfile committed; CI installs with `npm ci`
- [ ] New dependencies reviewed (maintenance, downloads, postinstall scripts)
### AI / LLM (if used)
- [ ] Model output treated as untrusted (no eval/SQL/innerHTML/shell)
- [ ] Secrets and other users' data kept out of prompts
- [ ] Tool/agent permissions scoped; destructive actions require confirmation
See Also
For detailed security checklists and pre-commit verification steps, see references/security-checklist.md.
Common Rationalizations
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "This is an internal tool, security doesn't matter" | Internal tools get compromised. Attackers target the weakest link. |
| "We'll add security later" | Security retrofitting is 10x harder than building it in. Add it now. |
| "No one would try to exploit this" | Automated scanners will find it. Security by obscurity is not security. |
| "The framework handles security" | Frameworks provide tools, not guarantees. You still need to use them correctly. |
| "It's just a prototype" | Prototypes become production. Security habits from day one. |
| "Threat modeling is overkill here" | Five minutes of "how would I attack this?" prevents the design flaws no control can patch later. |
| "It's just LLM output, it's only text" | That "text" can be a SQL statement, a script tag, or a shell command. Treat it like any untrusted input. |
Red Flags
- User input passed directly to database queries, shell commands, or HTML rendering
- Secrets in source code or commit history
- API endpoints without authentication or authorization checks
- Missing CORS configuration or wildcard (
*) origins - No rate limiting on authentication endpoints
- Stack traces or internal errors exposed to users
- Dependencies with known critical vulnerabilities
- Server fetches user-supplied URLs without an allowlist (SSRF)
- LLM/model output passed into a query, the DOM, a shell, or
eval - Secrets, PII, or the full system prompt placed inside an LLM context window
Verification
After implementing security-relevant code:
- [ ]
npm auditshows no critical or high vulnerabilities - [ ] No secrets in source code or git history
- [ ] All user input validated at system boundaries
- [ ] Authentication and authorization checked on every protected endpoint
- [ ] Security headers present in response (check with browser DevTools)
- [ ] Error responses don't expose internal details
- [ ] Rate limiting active on auth endpoints
- [ ] Server-side URL fetches validated against an allowlist (no SSRF)
- [ ] LLM/model output validated and encoded before use (if AI features present)

