Skip to main content

Good afternoon from Google's Security Team

At last Google responded to my two queries today. I have been receiving a lot of mails from them but this one is substantial.
First was in response with the issue I once arose with Yahoo also and second one was in response with my advisory written to Google. They say that once Hackers.org has also posted something like this in their blog. Some where they nearly accepts the things and some where underestimate as n non security issue. But I think..Security or Non security issue the implementation is wrong.Anyways I am happy they have given some reasonable answer.

Hi Nilesh,

Hope all is well with you. Chris here from Google's Security Team. A colleague of mine pointed out you have reported various security issues to us recently. Thank you very much for taking the time to do that, and I wanted to let you know where they stand.

1) Logout XSRF.
We will continue to track this, but as a low priority.
Unfortunately, logout XSRF is kind of endemic to the way the web works. For example, there's an attack you could term "cookie stuffing" whereby bombarding the victim's browser will knock out cookies for authenticated sites and effectively log the user out. There are other attacks that make it of questionable benefit to address this on Google's end.

2) Images redirector
Your report appears to be similar to a 2008 public discussed thread that we are tracking:
http://ha.ckers.org/blog/20080716/redirection-report/
The simple version is clearly framed as an external-to-Google result, but the powerful twist is having a child iframe use Javascript to change the location of the top frame. This situation needs new iframe option support in the major browsers, which we're starting to see a move towards.
We always monitor for redirector abuse and will act if we see any prior to the browser makers fixing up their model in this area.

Good mindset though, we appreciate it!

Cheers,
Chris, Google Security Team






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SQL Injection in search field

Earlier I had written about performing SQL injection in search field and how to do a DoS attack and privilege escalation using 'Like' operators. Now another SQLi exploitation I came across recently. That too in the search field. This becomes important as lots of people don't pay much attention on the search forms/ fields in the application. My aim is to show that a search form can also be exploited with SQL Injection. The following queries are based on a real world exploitation. The steps and data are for just illustration purpose only. Suppose, the search form provides the details of users who have accessed the application some time and their login time details etc, we just need to provide their name in the search box provided. All the data were being going as Post request. So, to just fingerprint the database, I provide, 'nil'+'esh' in the search field and it successfully gives me the results. That means the database behind the application is concatenat…

File Upload through Null Byte Injection

Sometimes, during file upload we come across situation wherein there would be check on the file extension at the client side as well as server side too. If the application does allow only .jpeg extension to be uploaded, the client side java script checks for the extension of the file before passing the request. We all know that how easily this can be defeated.
Some applications, checks for the extension at the server side also. That's not easy to bypass. However there are some ways with which it still can be bypassed. Most of server side scripts are written in high level languages such as Php, Java etc who still use some C/C++ libraries to read the file name and contents. That leads to the problem. In C/C++ a line ends with /00 or which is called Null Byte. So whenever the interpreter sees a null byte at the end of the a string, it stops reading thinking it has reached at the end of the string.
This can be used for the bypass. It works for many servers, specially php servers. Th…

Insecure protocols

Some basic insecure protocols and risk associated with them: