Skip to main content

Anti-CSRF measures and XSS

During an assessment of an application, I and my colleague Ronnie were discussing about a scenario in the application. The application had login section behind which there were few pages that were vulnerable to Reflected XSS. Application was also vulnerable to CSRF.Needless to say that we suggested anti-CSRF measures for the application. Although we also suggested anti-XSS measures but the anti-CSRF measures were good enough to mitigate any attempt to exploit the reflected XSS flaws on the pages behind authentication. The application was rejecting any external request.

So any attempt to exploit the reflected XSS will bear no fruit in scenario like this.

Anyways we had recommended fixing both flaws independently but I wanted to have a discussion over the issue.

Lots of people responded to that. All were with the same suggestion- do fix both issues, don't take chance.

But what I found most convincing were these arguments from MustLive and Lava:


MustLive says:


Hello Nilesh!

My suggestion to you and all people in such cases - always fix all holes.

There were similar cases in my practice, mentioned by you, when developers

was trying to argument to not fix XSS due to CSRF protection. Like in 2006

when I found many holes in WordPress 2.0.3 and developers trying to tell me

regarding one XSS that they have anti-CSRF tokens at that page, so no need

to fix that hole, but I said them that all holes must be fixed, and they

fixed. So fixed hole it's fixed exactly this hole (not some other hole).

........

Nilesh, you must understand, that there are methods which allow to bypass

anti-csrf filters, so if XSS will be left unfixed, then sometime it can be

used for attack.

........

Best wishes & regards,

MustLive

Administrator of Websecurity web site

http://websecurity.com.ua


Lava says:


Nilesh,

ClickJacking can be used to bypass Anti-CSRF measures in many instances.

........

Tomorrow we might have a new technique to bypass CSRF countermeasures.

And everytime that happens the application would be open to two attacks CSRF as well as XSS.

Moreover, if the attacker can perform a Session fixation attack and use his session's Anti-CSRF tokens to perform XSS, the user would still be in trouble.

........

Cheers,

Lava

http://www.andlabs.org


True, I agree with both of them. If any new technique comes tommorow which can bypass anti-CSRF filters (even today Clickjacking is there); then XSS would get exploited.

We had also similar concerns so we recommended developers to deal with both issues separately. But we just wanted to make our arguments more strong and asked people to provide us their valuable comments.

Thanks to all!






Comments

दिल की बात said…
I find you from Hakin9 IT mangzine.
your blog name tag there, I am very happy to see one india blogger or IT professional on the forigen IT magzine.

I am wishing you going high and high.
July 29, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
1 comment
Read more

'Information Leakage-Improper Error Handling' dropped

From Owasp Top 10 2010 List, the issue 'Information Leakage-Improper Error Handling' has been dropped. But it's not the final list,its child release actually. Bu I feel it shouldn't be set aside because its still the one of the prevalent issues these days. That's why I mailed to Dave Wicher: Hi Dave, Excellent work, Congrats! Just one little query- Don't you think that Information Leakage & Improper Error Handling still deserves to be in Top 10? Dave replied: This topic is clearly a very prevalent issue that deserves attention by most organizations. However, the typical impact of such a flaw is usually very low. Therefore, the overall risk of this type of flaw is lower than the other items in the top 10, which is why it was replaced in this update with one of the 2 new items. Regarding dropping Info Leak/Error handling - It is incredibly prevalent, no question. But their impact is typically very low, so the overall risk is low, which is why it fell out of t...
3 comments
Read more

jtool - an alternative to otool

jtool comes with a capability of running on Linux environment. Some ipa scanning tools are created to run on Linux environment where mac environment is not available. In such cases tools such as otool and class-dump-z will not work. So jtool can be an alternative to otool. For more information on jtool please refer to http://www.newosxbook.com/tools/jtool.html . It lists down various commands which have same output as otool or a equivalent. There are several commands mentioned in link. But for our customized requirements and basis checks I have listed down the below ones after running on many binaries. The outputs are similar or equivalent to otool and class-dump-z: Commands for checking PIE flag (ASLR) in jTool jtool -d -v -arch | grep stack ·           Automatic Reference Counting (ARC) protection: jtool -d -v -arch | grep _objc_release ·           To check if the devic...
1 comment
Read more