Skip to main content

Naughty ' or ''=' still works! ;)

Yes nothing new about this...I agree. This is one of the primary tools used by pen testers for detecting SQL injection flaws. So it's quite natural for any developer to have knowledge how to thwart this kind of attack from happening in their application, I mean ,very basic thing a developer can do in their application,the first line of defence against SQL injection attacks it is.
And they do, I have hardly come around this sort of negligence in any application I have audited.

But can you believe that one of the major website of an Airline is susceptible to this(sorry...I can't disclose)?? Even the site is very much live, used by customers, for doing transactions.
I was taken aback by this incident. Just supplied the query and voila! I had broken their authentication and clearly seeing the account of first customer. That's not single case..this happened at two different login sections ,one for customer account and another for Agent account.
Really surprising, this can't be treated as mistake..this is sheer negligence on the part of developers, on the part of Testers or on the part of authorities..I can't decide. You can understand the cases where a site's authentication mechanism is compromised by advanced methodologies, but this case is beyond any body's comprehension.
Even not this only...much of XSS are also there!
And even this is persistent flaw, every time you inject, you are through, with a very friendly advice popping up telling the logger to "USE STRONG PASSWORDS". :D

I think following might be reasons that a website security fails, as per Jeremiah's post:

1. No one at the organization understands or is responsible for maintaining the code.
2. Features are prioritized ahead of security fixes.
3. Affected code is owned by an unresponsive third-party vendor.
4. Website will be decommissioned replaced "soon".
5. Risk of exploitation is accepted.
6. Solution conflicts with business use case.
7. Compliance does not require it.
8.No one at the organization knows about, understands, or respects the issue.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ardilla- New tool for finding SQL Injection and XSS

Three Researchers -- MIT's Adam Kiezun , Stanford's Philip Guo , and Syracuse University's Karthick Jayaraman -- has developed a new tool ' Ardilla ' that automatically finds and exploits SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in Web applications. It creates inputs that pinpoint bugs in Web applications and then generates SQL injection and XSS attacks. But for now Ardilla is for PHP -based Web app only. The researchers say Ardilla found 68 never-before found vulnerabilities in five different PHP applications using the tool -- 23 SQL injection and 45 XSS flaws. More information is awaited. For their attack generation techniques refer to their document at: http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/mernst/pubs/create-attacks-tr054.pdf

Combining power of Fiddler with Burp

Both are pretty powerful tools when it comes to intercept and modify http communications. But at some point of time, they become even more powerful combo if tied with each other. They complement each other. In a recent pentest I came across a similar situation where in Burp was not able to intercept a specific kind of traffic and Fiddler came to rescue. The application was designed to upload video. The initial communication was straight forward, I mean logging into application, filling up the video details etc. And all these were easily captured by Burp except the point where you hit the Upload Video and it connects to a different server and surprisingly it was not captured by Burp, not sure why, even after repeated attempts. So, I fired Fiddler to see if the it sees this request. But it's a;ways to play with requests using Burp due to it's various functionalities like, Intruder, Repeaters etc. But it was necessary to capture this request in Burp. So the below steps can be

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. T