|
|||||||||||
|
RE: Top Ten Web App Sec Problems
From: Richard M. Smith <rms(at)computerbytesman.com>
Date: Tue Dec 03 2002 - 16:41:02 EST Richard
-----Original Message-----
Richard M. Smith asked: >Are there any known examples of cross-site scripting bugs being
Some public examples have already been mentioned. Some of the well-publicized e-commerce or e-banking hacks may have been performed through XSS; however, there is so little detail about such hacks that one cannot know for sure. XSS can have further-reaching implications than "just" cookie theft, although that seems to be the focus. For example, the ability to inject HTML into a web page would allow someone to exploit vulnerabilities in web clients. See some of the discussions in the November Bugtraq thread "A technique to mitigate cookie-stealing XSS attacks" Jeff Williams said: >Another issue in putting together a "top ten" list is the "superclass"
Agreed, but this is the difficult part :-) For example, canonicalization and directory traversal are very closely linked, yet they are discrete entities - you can have one without the other. I suspect that the OWASP "attack components" have analogs in the vulnerability world. The most obvious example is the symlink vulnerability, which has components including (a) bad permissions, (b) easily predictable filenames, and (c) race conditions enabled through non-atomic operations. Take any one of these components away, and you no longer have a symlink vulnerability. In the web app world, say you have a password file under the document root; you may have a mixture of (a) poor/no encryption, (b) bad permissions or ACLs, and possibly (c) poor design. Even buffer overflows have a number of variants besides "start copying bytes at offset 0 and run past the end of the buffer." There's also a close relationship between the vulnerability (the programmer/designer's "mistake") and the attack, but these lines often get blurry, especially in terminology. E.g. if you view "directory traversal" as "any means of escaping a restricted directory by manipulating pathnames," then you'll say that exploits involving "/absolute/path/here" or "C:\drive" are directory traversal, whereas others may only view ".." and its variants as directory traversal (I personally view these as "sufficiently different" - fixing/preventing one does not necessarily fix the other). I've been playing around with lower-level categorizations but have not made a lot of concrete progress, as it is a low-priority task. >A final factor that should go into the "top ten" decision process is
This has varying answers, even for the same type of issue. For example, format string vulnerabilities are easily findable in open source but more difficult in closed source. >Are there existing tools to search for it?
... both in source code auditing and testing ... >Do you need special tools to exploit? What are the consequences of
One can only provide an estimate for the likely results of an exploit against a vulnerability. Directory traversal severities can vary anywhere from directory listings to arbitrary command execution. >Our choices should represent the ones that we think will be the most
XSS is one type of vulnerability whose severity is variable and not fully understood, IMO.
################################################################# ################################################################# ################################################################# ##### ##### ##### ################################################################# ################################################################# #################################################################Received on Tue Dec 3 17:21:40 2002 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:07:45 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||