diff --git a/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-preview-r3.md b/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-preview-r3.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..48d4e79
--- /dev/null
+++ b/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-preview-r3.md
@@ -0,0 +1,508 @@
+# Threat Modeling Analysis for the Flask Project Using Attack Trees
+
+## 1. Understand the Project
+
+### Project Name: Flask
+
+#### Overview
+
+**Flask** is a lightweight and versatile web application framework written in Python. It is designed to help developers build web applications and APIs efficiently, offering a simple and unopinionated approach that allows flexibility in application structure and design. Flask follows a minimalist core philosophy, providing essential components needed for web development and relying on extensions for additional functionality.
+
+**Recent Updates (as of October 2023):**
+
+- **Async Support Enhancements:** Further improvements to asynchronous views and functions using `async` and `await`, enhancing performance in I/O-bound applications.
+- **Native WebSocket Support:** Introduction of built-in support for WebSocket connections, enabling real-time communication.
+- **Security Improvements:** Implementation of more secure default configurations, updated recommendations, and support for modern authentication mechanisms.
+- **Type Annotations:** Incorporation of type hints throughout the codebase, improving developer experience and enabling better static analysis.
+
+Flask remains widely used for developing web applications, from small prototypes to large-scale projects, due to its scalability and extensive ecosystem. It supports various technologies and integrates seamlessly with other libraries and tools in the Python ecosystem.
+
+#### Key Components and Features
+
+- **Werkzeug:** A comprehensive WSGI utility library that provides request and response objects, routing, and a debugger.
+- **Jinja2:** A modern and designer-friendly templating language for Python used by Flask for rendering dynamic web pages.
+- **ItsDangerous:** Provides cryptographic signing for data to ensure integrity.
+- **Click:** A package for creating command-line interfaces, utilized by Flask's CLI tools.
+- **Asynchronous Views:** Enhanced support for asynchronous request handling using `async` functions.
+- **WebSocket Support:** Built-in capabilities to handle WebSocket connections for real-time communication.
+- **Blueprints:** Support for structuring applications into components and supporting scalable application development.
+- **Flask Extensions:** A rich ecosystem of extensions that add functionality for database integration, form handling, authentication, and more.
+
+#### Dependencies
+
+- **Werkzeug**
+- **Jinja2**
+- **ItsDangerous**
+- **Click**
+
+Flask's functionality can be extended with optional dependencies based on the application's requirements.
+
+## 2. Define the Root Goal of the Attack Tree
+
+**Attacker's Ultimate Objective:**
+
+Compromise applications built with Flask by exploiting vulnerabilities, weaknesses, or misconfigurations within the Flask framework, its dependencies, or associated extensions.
+
+## 3. Identify High-Level Attack Paths (Sub-Goals)
+
+1. **Inject Malicious Code into Flask Package**
+2. **Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask**
+3. **Compromise Flask's Dependencies**
+4. **Leverage Common Misconfigurations**
+5. **Exploit Insecure Development Practices**
+6. **Compromise Distribution Channels**
+7. **Abuse New Features or Updates**
+8. **Exploit Third-Party Extensions**
+9. **Conduct Supply Chain Attacks via Dependency Confusion**
+10. **Exploit Weaknesses in Flask's Error Handling and Logging**
+11. **Attack Continuous Integration/Deployment Pipelines**
+
+## 4. Expand Each Attack Path with Detailed Steps
+
+### 1. Inject Malicious Code into Flask Package
+
+- **a. Compromise Flask's GitHub Repository**
+  - **Gain Unauthorized Access to Repository**
+    - Exploit vulnerabilities in GitHub's security mechanisms.
+    - Use stolen credentials of maintainers through phishing or credential stuffing.
+  - **Introduce Malicious Commits**
+    - Inject backdoors or malicious code into the codebase.
+    - Alter existing code to introduce subtle vulnerabilities.
+- **b. Compromise Maintainer's Local Environment**
+  - **Infect Maintainer's Development Machine**
+    - Use malware to modify code before it's committed.
+    - Exploit vulnerabilities in tools used by maintainers.
+- **c. Social Engineering**
+  - **Phishing Attacks on Maintainers**
+    - Send deceptive communications to trick maintainers into revealing credentials.
+  - **Impersonation in Communication Channels**
+    - Pose as a trusted contributor to gain trust and introduce malicious code.
+
+### 2. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask
+
+- **a. Identify Known Vulnerabilities**
+  - **Exploit CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures)**
+    - Utilize publicly disclosed vulnerabilities that have not been patched.
+- **b. Discover Zero-Day Vulnerabilities**
+  - **Code Analysis**
+    - Manually review Flask's source code for exploitable bugs.
+  - **Fuzz Testing**
+    - Use automated tools to find unexpected inputs that cause failures.
+- **c. Exploit Improper Input Validation**
+  - **Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)**
+    - Inject malicious scripts via form inputs or URLs.
+  - **Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI)**
+    - Inject malicious code into templates rendered by Flask.
+
+### 3. Compromise Flask's Dependencies
+
+- **a. Exploit Vulnerabilities in Dependencies**
+  - **Target Werkzeug, Jinja2, ItsDangerous, Click**
+    - Identify and exploit known vulnerabilities in these packages.
+- **b. Substitute Malicious Dependencies**
+  - **Dependency Confusion**
+    - Introduce malicious versions of dependencies that are unintentionally downloaded.
+- **c. Poisoning Dependency Repositories**
+  - **Publish Malicious Versions**
+    - Upload altered or malicious versions of dependencies to repositories like PyPI.
+
+### 4. Leverage Common Misconfigurations
+
+- **a. Debug Mode Enabled in Production**
+  - **Access Interactive Debugger**
+    - Exploit the debugger to execute arbitrary code on the server.
+- **b. Insecure Default Configurations**
+  - **Sensitive Data Exposure**
+    - Discover and access configuration files or environment variables containing secrets.
+- **c. Missing Input Validation**
+  - **SQL Injection**
+    - Inject malicious SQL queries through unsanitized inputs.
+- **d. Insecure Cookie Handling**
+  - **Session Hijacking**
+    - Steal or forge session cookies to impersonate users.
+
+### 5. Exploit Insecure Development Practices
+
+- **a. Inadequate Security Training**
+  - **Developers Unaware of Best Practices**
+    - Introduce vulnerabilities due to lack of knowledge.
+- **b. Lack of Code Reviews**
+  - **Unchecked Code Changes**
+    - Malicious code or vulnerabilities go unnoticed.
+- **c. Use of Outdated Libraries**
+  - **Known Vulnerabilities Present**
+    - Exploit flaws in outdated components.
+
+### 6. Compromise Distribution Channels
+
+- **a. Tamper with PyPI Repository**
+  - **Upload Malicious Versions of Flask**
+    - Replace legitimate Flask packages with malicious ones.
+- **b. Man-in-the-Middle Attacks**
+  - **Intercept Package Downloads**
+    - Deliver malicious packages during download over unsecured connections.
+
+### 7. Abuse New Features or Updates
+
+#### a. Exploiting WebSocket Implementation
+
+- **WebSocket Injection Attacks**
+  - **Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking**
+    - Hijack WebSocket connections to intercept or manipulate data.
+  - **Denial of Service (DoS) on WebSocket Endpoints**
+    - Overwhelm the server by sending excessive WebSocket requests.
+- **Improper Authentication on WebSocket Connections**
+  - **Unauthenticated Access**
+    - Exploit endpoints that don't enforce authentication.
+  - **Session Fixation**
+    - Manipulate session tokens to gain unauthorized access.
+
+#### b. Type Annotation Misuse
+
+- **Reflection-Based Attacks**
+  - **Inference of Application Logic**
+    - Use type hints to gain insights into the application's structure and extract sensitive information.
+
+### 8. Exploit Third-Party Extensions
+
+- **a. Identify Vulnerabilities in Extensions**
+  - **Exploit Known Flaws**
+    - Target extensions with known security issues.
+- **b. Malicious Extension Contributions**
+  - **Submit Malicious Code**
+    - Contribute code to extensions that introduces vulnerabilities.
+- **c. Dependency Chains**
+  - **Attack Less Secure Dependencies**
+    - Exploit vulnerabilities in dependencies used by extensions.
+
+### 9. Conduct Supply Chain Attacks via Dependency Confusion
+
+#### a. Dependency Confusion Attacks
+
+- **Upload Malicious Packages to Public Repositories**
+  - **Package Name Spoofing**
+    - Create malicious packages with names identical to internal packages.
+  - **Version Spoofing**
+    - Publish higher version numbers to supersede legitimate internal versions.
+- **Exploit Package Resolution Order**
+  - **Override Internal Dependencies**
+    - Influence package managers to install malicious public packages over private ones.
+
+### 10. Exploit Weaknesses in Flask's Error Handling and Logging
+
+#### a. Sensitive Data Exposure through Error Messages
+
+- **Detailed Error Messages in Production**
+  - **Information Disclosure**
+    - Trigger errors to receive stack traces revealing sensitive information, such as file paths and configuration details.
+
+#### b. Logging of Sensitive Information
+
+- **Insecure Logging Practices**
+  - **Log Injection Attacks**
+    - Inject malicious entries into logs that could be interpreted or executed by log analysis tools.
+  - **Exposure of Personally Identifiable Information (PII)**
+    - Access logs that contain sensitive user information.
+
+### 11. Attack Continuous Integration/Deployment Pipelines
+
+#### a. Compromise CI/CD Pipelines Used by Flask Applications
+
+- **Inject Malicious Code During Build Process**
+  - **CI/CD System Exploits**
+    - Exploit vulnerabilities in CI/CD tools to modify build artifacts.
+  - **Credentials Exposure**
+    - Access credentials stored in CI/CD environments to infiltrate systems.
+
+#### b. Exploit Automated Deployment Processes
+
+- **Unauthorized Access to Deployment Environments**
+  - **Misconfigured Deployment Tools**
+    - Leverage lax security settings to gain access to production environments.
+
+## 5. Visualize the Attack Tree
+
+```
+Root Goal: Compromise applications built with Flask by exploiting vulnerabilities in Flask
+
+[OR]
++-- 1. Inject Malicious Code into Flask Package
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Compromise Flask's GitHub Repository
+        [OR]
+        +-- Gain Unauthorized Access to Repository
+        +-- Introduce Malicious Commits
+    +-- b. Compromise Maintainer's Local Environment
+        +-- Infect Maintainer's Development Machine
+    +-- c. Social Engineering
+        [OR]
+        +-- Phishing Attacks on Maintainers
+        +-- Impersonation in Communication Channels
++-- 2. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Identify Known Vulnerabilities
+        +-- Exploit CVEs
+    +-- b. Discover Zero-Day Vulnerabilities
+        [OR]
+        +-- Code Analysis
+        +-- Fuzz Testing
+    +-- c. Exploit Improper Input Validation
+        [OR]
+        +-- Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)
+        +-- Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI)
++-- 3. Compromise Flask's Dependencies
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Exploit Vulnerabilities in Dependencies
+        +-- Target Werkzeug, Jinja2, etc.
+    +-- b. Substitute Malicious Dependencies
+        +-- Dependency Confusion
+    +-- c. Poisoning Dependency Repositories
+        +-- Publish Malicious Versions
++-- 4. Leverage Common Misconfigurations
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Debug Mode Enabled in Production
+        +-- Access Interactive Debugger
+    +-- b. Insecure Default Configurations
+        +-- Sensitive Data Exposure
+    +-- c. Missing Input Validation
+        +-- SQL Injection
+    +-- d. Insecure Cookie Handling
+        +-- Session Hijacking
++-- 5. Exploit Insecure Development Practices
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Inadequate Security Training
+    +-- b. Lack of Code Reviews
+    +-- c. Use of Outdated Libraries
++-- 6. Compromise Distribution Channels
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Tamper with PyPI Repository
+        +-- Upload Malicious Versions of Flask
+    +-- b. Man-in-the-Middle Attacks
+        +-- Intercept Package Downloads
++-- 7. Abuse New Features or Updates
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Exploiting WebSocket Implementation
+        [OR]
+        +-- WebSocket Injection Attacks
+            [OR]
+            +-- Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking
+            +-- DoS on WebSocket Endpoints
+        +-- Improper Authentication on WebSockets
+            [OR]
+            +-- Unauthenticated Access
+            +-- Session Fixation
+    +-- b. Type Annotation Misuse
+        +-- Reflection-Based Attacks
++-- 8. Exploit Third-Party Extensions
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Identify Vulnerabilities in Extensions
+    +-- b. Malicious Extension Contributions
+    +-- c. Dependency Chains
++-- 9. Conduct Supply Chain Attacks via Dependency Confusion
+    [AND]
+    +-- a. Dependency Confusion Attacks
+        [OR]
+        +-- Upload Malicious Packages to Public Repositories
+            [OR]
+            +-- Package Name Spoofing
+            +-- Version Spoofing
+        +-- Exploit Package Resolution Order
+            +-- Override Internal Dependencies
++-- 10. Exploit Weaknesses in Flask's Error Handling and Logging
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Sensitive Data Exposure through Error Messages
+        +-- Detailed Error Messages in Production
+    +-- b. Logging of Sensitive Information
+        [OR]
+        +-- Log Injection Attacks
+        +-- Exposure of PII
++-- 11. Attack Continuous Integration/Deployment Pipelines
+    [OR]
+    +-- a. Compromise CI/CD Pipelines
+        [OR]
+        +-- Inject Malicious Code During Build Process
+            +-- CI/CD System Exploits
+        +-- Credentials Exposure
+    +-- b. Exploit Automated Deployment Processes
+        +-- Unauthorized Access to Deployment Environments
+            +-- Misconfigured Deployment Tools
+```
+
+## 6. Assign Attributes to Each Node
+
+| Attack Step                                          | Likelihood | Impact | Effort  | Skill Level | Detection Difficulty |
+|------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------|---------|-------------|----------------------|
+| **1. Inject Malicious Code into Flask Package**      | Low        | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+| - Compromise Flask's GitHub Repository               | Low        | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+| - Compromise Maintainer's Local Environment          | Low        | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+| - Social Engineering                                 | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| **2. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask**     | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| - Exploit Known Vulnerabilities                      | Medium     | High   | Low     | Low         | Medium               |
+| - Discover Zero-Day Vulnerabilities                  | Low        | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+| **3. Compromise Flask's Dependencies**               | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | High                 |
+| **4. Leverage Common Misconfigurations**             | High       | High   | Low     | Low         | Low                  |
+| - Debug Mode Enabled in Production                   | High       | High   | Low     | Low         | Low                  |
+| - Insecure Configurations                            | High       | High   | Low     | Low         | Low                  |
+| **5. Exploit Insecure Development Practices**        | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| **6. Compromise Distribution Channels**              | Low        | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+| **7. Abuse New Features or Updates**                 | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| - Exploiting WebSocket Implementation                | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| - Type Annotation Misuse                             | Low        | Medium | Medium  | Medium      | High                 |
+| **8. Exploit Third-Party Extensions**                | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | Medium               |
+| **9. Supply Chain Attacks via Dependency Confusion** | Medium     | High   | Medium  | Medium      | High                 |
+| **10. Exploit Weaknesses in Error Handling**         | High       | Medium | Low     | Low         | Low                  |
+| **11. Attack CI/CD Pipelines**                       | Medium     | High   | High    | High        | High                 |
+
+## 7. Analyze and Prioritize Attack Paths
+
+### High-Risk Paths
+
+1. **Leverage Common Misconfigurations**
+
+   - **Likelihood:** High
+   - **Impact:** High
+   - **Justification:** Misconfigurations like enabling debug mode or exposing detailed error messages are widespread and can be easily exploited, potentially leading to system compromise with minimal effort.
+
+2. **Exploit Weaknesses in Error Handling and Logging**
+
+   - **Likelihood:** High
+   - **Impact:** Medium to High
+   - **Justification:** Improper error handling can disclose sensitive information, aiding attackers in crafting more effective attacks.
+
+3. **Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask**
+
+   - **Likelihood:** Medium
+   - **Impact:** High
+   - **Justification:** Failure to apply security patches promptly leaves applications vulnerable to known exploits that are readily available to attackers.
+
+4. **Abuse New Features or Updates (WebSocket Implementation)**
+
+   - **Likelihood:** Medium
+   - **Impact:** High
+   - **Justification:** New features may introduce unforeseen vulnerabilities, especially if not implemented securely.
+
+### Critical Nodes
+
+- **Debug Mode Enabled in Production:** Disabling debug mode is critical to prevent exposure of sensitive information and functionality.
+- **Detailed Error Messages in Production:** Implementing proper error handling prevents leakage of internal application details.
+- **Keeping Software Up-to-Date:** Regular updates mitigate the risk of known vulnerabilities being exploited.
+- **Proper Authentication on WebSockets:** Ensuring secure WebSocket connections protects against unauthorized access.
+
+## 8. Develop Mitigation Strategies
+
+### Mitigation for Common Misconfigurations
+
+- **Disable Debug Mode in Production**
+  - Ensure `DEBUG = False` in all production environments.
+  - Use environment variables or configuration files to manage settings securely.
+- **Secure Configuration Management**
+  - Regularly audit configurations for security compliance.
+  - Implement automated checks to detect insecure configurations.
+- **Input Validation**
+  - Utilize validation libraries to sanitize user inputs.
+  - Implement strict input validation on all forms and requests.
+
+### Mitigation for Error Handling and Logging
+
+- **Implement Proper Error Handling**
+  - Customize error pages to provide user-friendly messages without technical details.
+  - Use Flask's error handlers to catch exceptions and log them appropriately.
+- **Secure Logging Practices**
+  - Avoid logging sensitive data, such as passwords or personal information.
+  - Use secure logging solutions with access controls and encryption if necessary.
+
+### Mitigation for Exploiting Existing Vulnerabilities
+
+- **Regular Updates and Patch Management**
+  - Establish a routine for updating Flask and all dependencies.
+  - Monitor security advisories related to Flask and its components.
+- **Security Testing**
+  - Incorporate static code analysis and vulnerability scanning into the development lifecycle.
+  - Perform regular penetration testing on applications.
+
+### Mitigation for WebSocket Vulnerabilities
+
+- **Authentication and Authorization**
+  - Require authentication for establishing WebSocket connections.
+  - Implement authorization checks for actions performed over WebSockets.
+- **Input Sanitization**
+  - Validate and sanitize all data received through WebSockets.
+- **Rate Limiting**
+  - Implement rate limiting to prevent DoS attacks on WebSocket endpoints.
+
+### Mitigation for Supply Chain Attacks
+
+- **Use Trusted Sources**
+  - Configure package managers to use official and secure repositories.
+- **Verify Packages**
+  - Use cryptographic signatures or checksums to verify the integrity of packages.
+- **Dependency Management**
+  - Specify exact versions of dependencies and avoid using ambiguous versioning.
+
+### General Mitigation Strategies
+
+- **Security Training and Awareness**
+  - Provide regular training for developers on secure coding practices and new features.
+- **Code Review Processes**
+  - Implement mandatory peer reviews focusing on security aspects.
+- **Secure CI/CD Pipelines**
+  - Protect CI/CD environments with strong authentication and authorization.
+  - Regularly audit CI/CD configurations and access controls.
+
+## 9. Summarize Findings
+
+### Key Risks Identified
+
+- **Common Misconfigurations Leading to Easy Exploitation**
+- **Exposure of Sensitive Information Through Improper Error Handling**
+- **Vulnerabilities Introduced by New Features (e.g., WebSockets)**
+- **Exploitation of Known Vulnerabilities Due to Outdated Software**
+- **Supply Chain Risks Associated with Dependencies and Package Management**
+
+### Recommended Actions
+
+1. **Strengthen Configuration Management**
+   - Implement secure defaults and enforce configuration standards across all environments.
+2. **Enhance Error Handling and Logging**
+   - Ensure error messages and logs do not reveal sensitive information.
+3. **Maintain Up-to-Date Software and Dependencies**
+   - Regularly update Flask and its dependencies to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
+4. **Secure New Feature Implementations**
+   - Apply best practices when adopting new features, ensuring they do not introduce vulnerabilities.
+5. **Improve Supply Chain Security**
+   - Adopt rigorous dependency management practices, including verification and sourcing from trusted repositories.
+6. **Implement Robust Security Training**
+   - Educate development and operations teams on current security threats and best practices.
+7. **Protect CI/CD Pipelines**
+   - Secure CI/CD environments with proper access controls and monitoring.
+
+## 10. Questions & Assumptions
+
+### Questions
+
+- **Configuration Management**
+  - Are there automated processes in place to enforce secure configurations across all environments?
+- **Update and Patch Processes**
+  - How frequently are updates applied to Flask and its dependencies?
+  - Is there a process for monitoring and addressing new security advisories?
+- **Training and Awareness**
+  - What training programs are in place to keep developers informed about secure coding practices?
+- **WebSocket Usage**
+  - How widely are WebSocket features used, and what security measures are implemented?
+- **Supply Chain Management**
+  - What policies exist for dependency management and verification?
+- **CI/CD Security**
+  - How are CI/CD pipelines secured against unauthorized access and code injection?
+
+### Assumptions
+
+- **Varied Security Posture Across Teams**
+  - Assumed that different teams may have inconsistent security practices.
+- **Resource Constraints**
+  - Assumed that resource limitations may impact the ability to implement all recommended measures immediately.
+- **Adoption of New Features**
+  - Assumed that some teams may adopt new Flask features without fully understanding the security implications.
+
+---
+
+By addressing these risks and implementing the recommended mitigation strategies, organizations can significantly enhance the security of their Flask applications. Regular audits, proactive security measures, and continuous education are essential to protect against evolving threats and ensure robust application security.
diff --git a/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-r3.md b/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-r3.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..72826c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/examples/GITHUB-ATTACK-TREE-FLASK-o1-r3.md
@@ -0,0 +1,338 @@
+Below is the latest consolidated Threat Modeling Analysis for Flask, integrating all previously gathered information and keeping it consistent with recent considerations around container/cloud deployments, environment variables, and supply chain attacks. No major new CVEs or high-severity vulnerabilities have been publicly disclosed for Flask itself as of this writing (October 2023). Organizations should, however, remain attentive to vulnerabilities in Flask’s dependencies (e.g., Jinja2, MarkupSafe, and Werkzeug), including any newly reported issues (e.g., ReDoS, RCE). The analysis remains substantially the same, with minor clarifications noted in Section 2 and Section 4 regarding dependency vulnerabilities.
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+1. Understand the Project
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+1.1 Overview
+Flask is a popular micro web framework written in Python. It provides tools, libraries, and technologies that enable developers to build web applications quickly and with minimal boilerplate. Flask is designed to be simple yet extensible, allowing developers to add functionalities (e.g., authentication, database connections) via extensions or custom code.
+
+1.2 Key Components and Features
+• Core: Request handling, routing, and flexible component-based architecture.
+• Werkzeug: A WSGI utility library that underpins Flask’s request/response handling.
+• Jinja2: A templating engine for rendering dynamic content.
+• CLI & Debug Features: A built-in development server, debug mode, and CLI to streamline development.
+• Extension Ecosystem: Numerous community-provided extensions (e.g., Flask-Login, Flask-SQLAlchemy).
+
+1.3 Dependencies
+• Python standard library.
+• Werkzeug, Jinja2, Click, MarkupSafe, and other libraries listed in requirements.
+• Optional third-party extensions for authentication, database connectivity, etc.
+
+1.4 Container / Cloud Considerations
+• Many Flask apps are now run in containers (Docker, Kubernetes, etc.).
+• Developers commonly rely on environment variables for runtime configuration (e.g., SECRET_KEY).
+• Third-party or community Dockerfiles may inadvertently introduce vulnerabilities if misconfigured.
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+2. Define the Root Goal of the Attack Tree
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+Attacker’s Ultimate Objective:
+“Compromise applications (or underlying servers/containers) that use Flask by exploiting weaknesses in the Flask framework, its defaults/configuration, its supply chain, or container/cloud deployment patterns.”
+
+Clarification:
+• This goal encompasses upstream (Flask source, distribution) and downstream (misconfigured deployments) attacks.
+• It also includes exploits of recently observed library vulnerabilities in Jinja2 or MarkupSafe (e.g., potential ReDoS conditions) and focuses on how an attacker might leverage them to compromise Flask-based systems.
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+3. Identify High-Level Attack Paths (Sub-Goals)
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+A. Inject Malicious Code Into the Flask Codebase or Distribution
+   1. Compromise the Flask GitHub repository or distribution channels.
+   2. Insert malicious commits, tags, or dependencies.
+
+B. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask or Its Dependencies
+   1. Zero-day or known vulnerabilities (Flask core, Werkzeug, Jinja2, MarkupSafe).
+   2. Abuse insecure default configurations (debug mode, session misconfigurations).
+
+C. Leverage Common Misconfigurations by End Users
+   1. Deploying Flask in debug mode in production.
+   2. Missing input validation or sanitization in custom application code.
+   3. Insecure session management or secrets handling.
+
+D. Compromise Development & Contribution Process
+   1. Social engineering maintainers or contributors (phishing, stolen tokens).
+   2. Malicious pull requests exploiting weak review processes.
+
+E. Exploit Container / Cloud Misconfigurations
+   1. Docker misconfigurations (privileged containers, leftover debug settings).
+   2. Insecure environment variables (exposed SECRET_KEY, credentials).
+   3. Supply chain poisoning via container registries (tampered base images, typosquatting).
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+4. Expand Each Attack Path with Detailed Steps
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+A. Inject Malicious Code into Flask
+   A.1 Compromise the GitHub repository
+       • A.1.1 Steal or phish maintainer credentials.
+       • A.1.2 Exploit weak 2FA or session token hijacking.
+       • A.1.3 Repository security breaches (e.g., unpatched GitHub Actions).
+         [AND – must gain push permissions and bypass checks]
+
+   A.2 Insert malicious commits or tags
+       • A.2.1 Introduce backdoor code (exfiltration, RCE logic).
+       • A.2.2 Modify setup configurations to pull malicious dependencies.
+         [OR – either form can achieve the sub-goal]
+
+   A.3 Compromise distribution channels (e.g., PyPI)
+       • A.3.1 Upload tampered Flask package.
+       • A.3.2 Typosquatting packages (“flask_”, “flasky” etc.).
+
+B. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities
+   B.1 Zero-day or known vulnerabilities
+       • B.1.1 RCE in Flask’s request handling (hypothetical).
+       • B.1.2 Jinja2 or MarkupSafe exploit (e.g., ReDoS, code injection).
+         [OR – multiple vectors for code or data compromise]
+
+   B.2 Insecure default configurations
+       • B.2.1 Debug mode in production.
+       • B.2.2 Weak session cookies or missing HTTPS.
+         [AND – attacker must find these misconfigurations and exploit them]
+
+C. Common Misconfigurations by End Users
+   C.1 Debug mode incorrectly left enabled
+       • C.1.1 Remote debugger console can grant RCE.
+
+   C.2 Missing input validation / sanitization
+       • C.2.1 Inject malicious payloads via forms or headers.
+       • C.2.2 Chain with Jinja2/Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI).
+
+   C.3 Insecure session management
+       • C.3.1 Predictable session cookies due to weak (or default) SECRET_KEY.
+       • C.3.2 Reuse of session tokens across multiple hosts.
+
+D. Compromise Development & Contribution Process
+   D.1 Social engineering of maintainers
+       • D.1.1 Targeted phishing for 2FA codes, GitHub tokens.
+       • D.1.2 Masquerade as known contributor or extension maintainer.
+
+   D.2 Submit malicious pull requests
+       • D.2.1 Insert malicious logic disguised in normal commits.
+       • D.2.2 Exploit inadequate or rushed code reviews.
+
+E. Exploit Container / Cloud Misconfigurations
+   E.1 Docker misconfiguration
+       • E.1.1 Run container in debug mode; external attacker gains RCE.
+       • E.1.2 Privileged or root containers leading to container breakout.
+
+   E.2 Insecure environment variables
+       • E.2.1 SECRET_KEY or credentials stored in plaintext in images or logs.
+       • E.2.2 Attacker overrides environment variables to disable security.
+         [OR – any environment variable injection can subvert assumptions]
+
+   E.3 Supply chain poisoning in container registries
+       • E.3.1 Tampered base images that contain hidden backdoors.
+       • E.3.2 Typosquatted container images (misleading official-sounding names).
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+5. Visualize the Attack Tree (Text-Based)
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+Root Goal: Compromise systems using Flask by exploiting weaknesses in Flask
+
+[OR]
++-- A. Inject Malicious Code Into Flask
+|   [AND]
+|   +-- A.1 Compromise GitHub Repository
+|   |   [OR]
+|   |   +-- A.1.1 Steal Maintainer Credentials
+|   |   +-- A.1.2 2FA/Session Hijacking
+|   |   +-- A.1.3 Other Repository Breaches
+|   |
+|   +-- A.2 Insert Malicious Commits/Tags
+|   |   [OR]
+|   |   +-- A.2.1 Backdoor Code
+|   |   +-- A.2.2 Malicious Dependencies
+|   |
+|   +-- A.3 Compromise Distribution Channels
+|       [OR]
+|       +-- A.3.1 Tampered Flask Package (PyPI)
+|       +-- A.3.2 Typosquatting
+|
++-- B. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities
+|   [OR]
+|   +-- B.1 Zero-Day or Known Bugs
+|   |   [OR]
+|   |   +-- B.1.1 RCE in Request Handling
+|   |   +-- B.1.2 Jinja2/MarkupSafe Exploit
+|   |
+|   +-- B.2 Insecure Default Configurations
+|       [AND]
+|       +-- B.2.1 Debug Mode in Production
+|       +-- B.2.2 Weak Session Cookies
+|
++-- C. Exploit Common User Misconfigurations
+|   [OR]
+|   +-- C.1 Debug Mode in Production
+|   +-- C.2 Missing Input Validation
+|   +-- C.3 Insecure Session Management
+|
++-- D. Compromise Development & Contribution
+|   [OR]
+|   +-- D.1 Social Engineering Maintainers
+|   |   [OR]
+|   |   +-- D.1.1 Phish for Credentials
+|   |   +-- D.1.2 Masquerade as Upstream
+|   |
+|   +-- D.2 Malicious Pull Requests
+|       [OR]
+|       +-- D.2.1 Insert Disguised Code
+|       +-- D.2.2 Exploit Weak Reviews
+|
++-- E. Exploit Container / Cloud Misconfigurations
+    [OR]
+    +-- E.1 Docker Misconfiguration
+    |   [OR]
+    |   +-- E.1.1 Debug Mode in Container
+    |   +-- E.1.2 Privileged/Root Container
+    |
+    +-- E.2 Insecure Environment Variables
+    |   [OR]
+    |   +-- E.2.1 SECRET_KEY or Credentials Exposed
+    |   +-- E.2.2 Override Security Settings
+    |
+    +-- E.3 Supply Chain Poisoning (Registries)
+        [OR]
+        +-- E.3.1 Tampered Base Images
+        +-- E.3.2 Typosquatting Container Images
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+6. Assign Attributes to Each Node
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+Below is a representative set of attribute values for major nodes. Actual risk levels vary by environment and threat intelligence.
+
+┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┬───────────┬─────────┬─────────┬──────────────┬────────────────────┐
+│ Attack Step                                                                 │Likelihood │ Impact  │ Effort  │ Skill Level  │ Detection Difficulty│
+├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────┤
+│ A. Inject Malicious Code Into Flask                                        │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ High         │ High               │
+│ └─ A.1 Compromise GitHub Repository                                        │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ A.1.1 Steal Maintainer Credentials                                   │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ A.1.2 2FA Bypass / Phishing                                         │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    └─ A.1.3 Other Repository Security Breaches                             │ Low       │ High    │ High    │ High         │ Medium             │
+│ └─ A.2 Insert Malicious Commits/Tags                                       │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ A.2.1 Introduce Backdoor Code                                        │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    └─ A.2.2 Modify Setup Config                                            │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│ └─ A.3 Compromise Distribution Channels (PyPI)                             │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ A.3.1 Tampered Flask Package                                         │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    └─ A.3.2 Typosquatting Packages                                         │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────┤
+│ B. Exploit Existing Vulnerabilities in Flask                               │ Medium    │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│ └─ B.1 Zero-Day / Known Vulnerabilities                                    │ Medium    │ High    │ High    │ High         │ High               │
+│    ├─ B.1.1 RCE via Flask Handling                                        │ Medium    │ High    │ High    │ High         │ Medium             │
+│    └─ B.1.2 Jinja2 / MarkupSafe Exploit                                   │ Medium    │ High    │ High    │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│ └─ B.2 Insecure Default Configurations                                     │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ B.2.1 Debug Mode Misuse                                             │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    └─ B.2.2 Insufficient Session Protection                                │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────┤
+│ C. Exploit Common User Misconfigurations                                   │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Low                │
+│ └─ C.1 Debug Mode in Production                                           │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│ └─ C.2 Missing Input Validation                                           │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Low                │
+│ └─ C.3 Insecure Session Management                                        │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────┤
+│ D. Compromise Development & Contribution Process                           │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│ └─ D.1 Social Engineering Maintainers                                     │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ D.1.1 Phish for Maintainer Credentials                              │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│    └─ D.1.2 Masquerade as Trusted Upstream                                │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Medium  │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│ └─ D.2 Malicious Pull Requests                                            │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ D.2.1 Insert Disguised Code                                         │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    └─ D.2.2 Exploit Inadequate Review Processes                           │ Medium    │ Medium  │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼─────────┼─────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────┤
+│ E. Exploit Container / Cloud Misconfigurations                             │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│ └─ E.1 Docker Misconfiguration                                            │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ E.1.1 Container Runs in Debug Mode                                  │ High      │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    └─ E.1.2 Privileged/Root Container                                     │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Medium       │ Medium             │
+│ └─ E.2 Insecure Environment Variables                                     │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    ├─ E.2.1 SECRET_KEY or Credentials Exposed                             │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│    └─ E.2.2 Override Security Settings via ENV                             │ Medium    │ High    │ Low     │ Low          │ Medium             │
+│ └─ E.3 Supply Chain Poisoning in Container Registries                     │ Low       │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ High               │
+│    ├─ E.3.1 Tampered Base Images                                         │ Low       │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ High               │
+│    └─ E.3.2 Typosquatting Container Images                                │ Low       │ High    │ Medium  │ Medium       │ High               │
+└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┴─────────┴─────────┴──────────────┴────────────────────┘
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+7. Analyze and Prioritize Attack Paths
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+7.1 High-Risk Paths
+• Insecure defaults and simple misconfigurations (debug mode, session keys) continue to be the most exploited in practice.
+• Container misconfiguration is a growing concern, especially privileged containers or leaked environment variables.
+• Supply chain compromises (in PyPI or container registries) can reach a vast number of downstream apps.
+
+7.2 Critical Nodes
+• Debug Mode in Production (B.2.1, C.1, E.1.1) – a recurring theme enabling easy RCE.
+• Insecure Environment Variables (E.2) – leaked SECRET_KEY or credentials can be a single point of compromise.
+• Repository/Distribution Compromises (A.1, A.3, E.3) – widespread impact if PyPI or container images are poisoned.
+
+7.3 Justification
+• Flask’s popularity means a single vulnerability or configuration oversight can have a massive blast radius.
+• Docker and Kubernetes usage is pervasive, increasing the chance of misconfiguration.
+• Supply chain attacks have increased industry-wide; any compromise at the source has downstream impact.
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+8. Develop Mitigation Strategies
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+A. Repository & Distribution Protections
+• Enforce strong MFA (preferably hardware-based) for all maintainers.
+• Sign commits/releases (e.g., GPG) on GitHub and PyPI so consumers can verify authenticity.
+• Use automated scanning (e.g., CodeQL, SAST) and code-review workflows to catch malicious changes.
+
+B. Secure Default Configurations
+• Provide explicit warnings about debug mode usage in production.
+• Offer “production-ready” templates with recommended session handling, HTTPS, and robust SECRET_KEY guidance.
+• Guide developers on environment-based config separation (development vs. production).
+
+C. Educate Users on Secure Implementation
+• Publish best practices for input validation, session management, CSRF defense.
+• Emphasize secret/key rotation and usage of secure secret managers.
+• Provide example Dockerfiles or Helm charts that disable debug mode, use non-root users, and secure environment variables.
+
+D. Hardening the Development / Contribution Process
+• Mandatory code review and security scanning for pull requests.
+• Maintain a robust contributor security policy (vulnerability disclosure, bug bounty, etc.).
+• Monitor commits for unexpected or suspicious changes (e.g., large diffs in non-core areas).
+
+E. Container & Cloud Security
+• Provide (or recommend) official Docker images with secure defaults and minimal privileges.
+• Encourage scanning of container images with tools (Trivy, Clair) to detect malicious layers.
+• Sign container images; host them in trusted or private registries.
+• Educate on the dangers of environment variable exposure (e.g., logs, version control).
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+9. Summarize Findings
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+9.1 Key Risks Identified
+• Debug mode: Still the easiest path to RCE if left enabled in production.
+• Supply chain attacks (PyPI, container registries, GitHub repos) could have widespread impact.
+• Mismanaged credentials/environment variables (SECRET_KEY, DB credentials) or privileged containers open severe attack avenues.
+
+9.2 Recommended Actions
+• Strengthen repository security (2FA, commit signing, code review).
+• Improve official documentation on secure container deployment and environment management.
+• Provide or endorse “secure-by-default” Docker images with well-defined production settings.
+• Maintain a formal vulnerability response process to handle new disclosures quickly (including those in dependencies like Jinja2/MarkupSafe).
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+10. Questions & Assumptions
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+Questions:
+1. Does the Pallets team maintain official container images for Flask? If so, are they fully hardened?
+2. Has 2FA or hardware MFA been mandated for all core maintainers across GitHub and PyPI?
+3. Are commits/releases signed before publication or distribution?
+4. How do typical Flask container deployments (Docker Compose, Kubernetes) handle secret storage in practice?
+
+Assumptions:
+1. Flask’s CI includes standard code reviews and automated tests but might not enforce signed commits.
+2. Many community Dockerfiles provide minimal security guidance, leading to frequent “debug mode in production” mistakes.
+3. Routine refinements to Jinja2 or MarkupSafe may continue to appear; project maintainers should stay on top of newly disclosed library vulnerabilities.
+4. Production deployments often rely on environment variables for secrets and config, which may be inadvertently exposed.
+
+────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+This final Threat Modeling Analysis reflects current knowledge (as of October 2023) on both traditional web security concerns and container/cloud supply chain risks. As Flask continues to evolve, stakeholders (maintainers, contributors, and end-users) should remain vigilant about new or updated library vulnerabilities (e.g., in MarkupSafe or Jinja2), enforce secure development practices, and keep container configurations locked down. Providing well-documented, secure-by-default references and CI/CD checks will help minimize exposure and ensure Flask remains robust in modern deployment scenarios.