I am trying to understand the below injection and what it is trying to do. What is it trying to get? The only portion I understand is the union and select part, but the full injection I am unsure of and need help understanding.
action=&aid=1&_FILES%5Btype%5D%5Btmp_name%5D=%5C%27%20or%20mid=#%60%5C%27%60%20/!50000union//!50000select/1,2,3,(select%20CONCAT(0x7c,userid,0x7c,pwd)+from+%60%23#__admin%60%20limit+0,1),5,6,7,8,9%23#%60%5C%27%60+&_FILES%5Btype%5D%5Bname%5D=1.jpg&_FILES%5Btype%5D%5Btype%5D=application/octet-stream&_FILES%5Btype%5D%5Bsize%5D=4294
Well, first we can url decode the string:
action=
&aid=1
&_FILES[type][tmp_name]=\' or mid=#`\'`/!50000union//!50000select/1,2,3,(select CONCAT(0x7c,userid,0x7c,pwd) from `##__admin` limit 0,1),5,6,7,8,9##`\'`
&_FILES[type][name]=1.jpg
&_FILES[type][type]=application/octet-stream
&_FILES[type][size]=4294
One of these parameters sticks out as pretty suspicious.
[tmp_name]=\' OR mid=#`\'`
/!50000union/
/!50000select/1,2,3,
(select CONCAT(0x7c,userid,0x7c,pwd)
from `##__admin`
limit 0,1)
,5,6,7,8,9##`\'`
In plain english, it's injecting a select query to get usernames and passwords in a format like 0x7c<user>0x7c<password> from the ##__admin table (which, according to #DCoder is likely a placeholder for the actual table where these values would be kept) and appending it to your original select.
The !50000 stuff is for bypassing your web application firewall (if you have one). If you don't, then it may just be a bot or automated attempt. Or someone following a script to see what works. The numbers aren't really useful - it may be for evading a firewall or just for debugging purposes for the attacker to see how the output looks. It's hard to tell without being able to run it.
Here's what the SQL the attacker is trying to run would look like in 'plain SQL':
select
userid,
pwd
from
`##__admin`
Do you have a table like this? When you go to this url for your site, does it dump the user table? If not, then you may not even have a problem and it is just an automated scan. You may still have issues with SQL injection, even if it doesn't work, but having this in your logs is not evidence of a breach... it's definitely a red flag though.
It's adding extra columns to the result recordset, with user/pwd information. So in essence, the user wants to collect user accounts he or she wants to abuse.
It have to be noted that SQL injection (if any) is made possible by another vulnerability.
It is clear that this application is depending (or at least it is believed by the malicious user) on the some sort of homebrewed implementation of register_globals. A worst implementation ever.
To make this code work, the application have to take GET variables, and blindly convert them in global variables, making $_FILE array to appear not from internal process but from mere GET request.
Related
This is my first question on stack overflow and I have taken a lot of time to search for the similar question but surprisingly could not find one.
So I read that no data should be trusted, whether from a client or that which is coming out of a database. Now while there are lots of examples that show how to sanitize data from a user ($_POST or $_GET), I could not find one that shows how the data from a database should be sanitized.
Now maybe it's the same as the data coming from a user / client (that's what I think it should be) but I found no example of it. So I am asking it just to make sure.
So for example if the result of a query yields as follows:-
$row=mysqli_fetch_assoc($result);
$pw = $row['Password'];
$id = $row['ID'];
$user = $row['Username'];
then do the variables $pw, $id and $user have to be sanitized before they should be used in the program? If so, then how ?
Thanks to all.
Your thinking is back to front here. By the time you are able to sanitise inputs using php, it's probably too late. The data is already in php. You don't sanitise inputs. You:
validate input & sanitise output
Normally a database is wrapped by the application tier. So the only data in there should have been filtered and escaped by your code. You should be able to trust it. But even then, in a relational database the data is fairly strongly typed. Hence there is little scope for attacking php from the data tier.
But you should be sanitising (escaping or encoding) any output. How you do that depends on where and how you are sending the data, hence it should be done at the point where it leaves php, not the point where it enters php. And the method you use (mysqli_escape, HTMLentities, base64, urlencode.....) Should be appropriate to where the data is going. Indeed it is better practice to change the representation of a copy of the data (and discard it after use) rather than the original.
It depends... How are you accessing this database? Who works on / maintains it? Going in is definitely a far bigger concern. However, if you wanted to sanitize it coming out of a database you need to know what you are sanitizing for. If you want to sanitize web traffic against XSS you'd probably want to remove all url's not on a whitelist, perhaps script tags and a few other things as well. Are you sanitizing data going into a C/C++ program? Then you probably want to make sure you're protecting yourself against buffer overflow issues as this is a legitimate avenue of attack.
I'm drawing some assumptions about your design here but I'm going to assume you're just working on the model aspect of an MVC application using PHP. PHP, in this case, has been most vulnerable to SQL Injection attacks on the backend, and XSS (cross site scripting) attacks on the front end. (NOTE: This isn't a PHP problem exclusively, this is a problem in all programming and different languages provide different solutions to different problems. Remember - you need to know what you're sanitizing for what reason. There is no one size fits all.
So really, unless you are sanitizing against something universal in all the code this model will sanitize for, you probably don't want to sanitize here. XSS would be a bigger concern to you now than sql injection... the way out is too late to stop an injection attack.
To take some liberty just to get the juices flowing - From a security standpoint, given your code seems to revolve around authentication, I would be much more immediately concerned around how you are storing and processing your credentialing data. A few things should definitely be doing:
Running the password through a secure, 1-way hash BEFORE storage (such as BCrypt).
Salting these hashes (with a different salt for EACH user) before storing them in the database to protect your user's data from things such as rainbow table attacks.
Using TLS for all communications.
Establishing and maintaining a secure session (track user-login without exposing password data with every single request sent, amongst other things).
People say to prevent SQL Injection, you can do one of the following (amongst other things):
Prepare statements (parameterized)
Stored procedures
Escaping user input
I have done item 1, preparing my statements, but I'm now wondering if I should escape all user input as well. Is this a waste of time seeming as I have prepared statements or will this double my chances of prevention?
It's usually a waste of time to escape your input on top of using parametrized statements. If you are using a database "driver" from the database vendor and you are only using parametrized
statements without doing things like SQL String concatenation or trying to parametrize the actual SQL syntax, instead of just providing variable values, then you are already as safe as you can be.
To sum it up, your best option is to trust the database vendor to know how to escape values inside their own SQL implementation instead of trying to roll your own encoder, which for a lot of DBs out there can be a lot more work then you think.
If on top of this you want additional protection you can try using a SQL Monitoring Solution. There are a few available that can spot out-of-the-ordinary SQL queries and block/flag them, or just try to learn your default app behavior and block everything else. Obviously your mileage may vary with these based on your setup and use-cases.
Certainly the first step to prevent SQL Injection attacks is to always use parameterised queries, never concatenate client supplied text into a SQL string. The use of stored procedures is irrelevant once you have taken the step to parameterise.
However there is a secondary source of SQL injection where SQL code itself (usually in an SP) will have to compose some SQL which is then EXEC'd. Hence its still possible to be vunerable to injection even though your ASP code is always using parameterised queries. If you can be certain that none of your SQL does that and will never do that then you are fairly safe from SQL Injection. Depending on what you are doing and what version to SQL Server you are using there are occasions where SQL compositing SQL is unavoidable.
With the above in mind a robust approach may require that your code examines incoming string data for patterns of SQL. This can be fairly intense work because attackers can get quite sophisticated in avoiding SQL pattern detection. Even if you feel the SQL you are using is not vunerable it useful to be able to detect such attempts even if they fail. Being able to pick that up and record additional information about the HTTP requests carrying the attempt is good.
Escaping is the most robust approach, in that case though all the code that uses the data in you database must understand the escaping mechanim and be able to unescape the data to make use of it. Imagine a Server-side report generating tool for example, would need to unescape database fields before including them in reports.
Server.HTMLEncode prevents a different form of Injection. Without it an attacker could inject HTML (include javascript) into the output of your site. For example, imagine a shop front application that allowed customers to review products for other customers to read. A malicious "customer" could inject some HTML that might allow them to gather information about other real customers who read their "review" of a popular product.
Hence always use Server.HTMLEncode on all string data retrieved from a database.
Back in the day when I had to do classic ASP, I used both methods 2 and 3. I liked the performance of stored procs better and it helps to prevent SQL injection. I also used a standard set of includes to filter(escape) user input. To be truly safe, don't use classic ASP, but if you have to, I would do all three.
First, on the injections in general:
Both latter 2 has nothing to do with injection actually.
And the former doesn't cover all the possible issues.
Prepared statements are okay until you have to deal with identifiers.
Stored provedures are vulnerable to injections as well. It is not an option at all.
"escaping" "user input" is most funny of them all.
First, I suppose, "escaping" is intended for the strings only, not whatever "user input". Escaping all other types is quite useless and will protect nothing.
Next, speaking of strings, you have to escape them all, not only coming from the user input.
Finally - no, you don't have to use whatever escaping if you are using prepared statements
Now to your question.
As you may notice, HTMLEncode doesn't contain a word "SQL" in it. One may persume then, that Server.HTMLEncode has absolutely nothing to do with SQL injections.
It is more like another attack prevention, called XSS. Here it seems a more appropriate action and indeed should be used on the untrusted user input.
So, you may use Server.HTMLEncode along with prepared statements. But just remember that it's completely different attacks prevention.
You may also consider to use HTMLEncode before actual HTML output, not at the time of storing data.
My coworker is insisting that the use of a global modification number to mask query string IDs is a good idea.
public static readonly int ModificationNumber = 9081234;
And Elsewhere:
_addressID = Convert.ToInt32(Request.QueryString["AddressId"]) - ModificationNumber;
I can't seem to get my head around this. If someone wanted to try some url hacking then a modification number makes no difference at all.
Are there other reasons this would make a site more secure?
Furthermore, are there explicit reasons this is bad? In my mind the less globals the better.
IMVHO your colleague is kind of on the right track, but not quite.
A good rule to follow is that you should never expose actual IDs in the query string, as that gives a clue as to the structure of your database, and makes it just that little bit easier for someone to carry out a SQL injection type attack (they can target specific records because they know the ID).
So your colleague is attempting to achieve this, albeit in a very round-about way. Personally I wouldn't do it this way because it will simply be a matter of time before a smart attacker works out what you are doing and then works out what the magic number is. It also doesn't really do anything to prevent a SQL injection attack against specific records, as the generated number may match an existing key anyway. If you are relying on this methodology to avoid SQL attacks then you have deeper issues that need to be addressed.
Edit
Mentioning an alternative is probably a fair thing to do.
As you are using C# and pulling parameters out of the querystring, I will assume you are using ASP.NET. In that case, important IDs can be kept in Session or the Cache. You can store a bunch of items in a custom data object, which you then store in Session (this saves having to keep track of lots of IDs, you just need to know one). ASP.NET manages the web app's Session for you, it is unique to each user, and you can use it to store stuff when you transition from page to page.
If you are manually tracking session or using a database to keep your session related info then you can still serialize the aforementioned data object into the database using a generated GUID as its key, and append that GUID to the query string (there is only an incredibly low chance of success if a user messes with a GUID to try and assume someone else's session, you can lower that chance even further by concatenating two GUIDs as a key, etc.).
How would you go about hiding sensitive information from going into log files? Yes, you can consciously choose not to log sensitive bits of information in the first place, but there can be general cases where you blindly log error messages upon failures or trace messages while investigating a problem etc. and end up with sensitive information landing in your log files.
For example, you could be trying to insert an order record that contains the credit card number of a customer into the database. Upon a database failure, you may want to log the SQL statement that was just executed. You would then end up with the credit card number of the customer in a log file.
Is there a design paradigm that can be employed to "tag" certain bits of information as sensitive so that a generic logging pipeline can filter them out?
My current practice for the case in question is to log a hash of such sensitive information. This enables us to identify log records that belong to a specific claim (for example a specific credit-card number) but does not give anybody the power to just grab the logs and use the sensitive information for their evil purposes.
Of course, doing this consistently involves good coding practices. I usually choose to log all objects using their toString overloads (in Java or .NET) which serializes the hash of the values for fields marked with a Sensitive attribute applied to them.
Of course, SQL strings are more problematic, but we rely more on our ORM for data persistence and log the state of the system at various stages then log SQL queries, thus it is becomes a non-issue.
I would personally regard the log files themselves as sensitive information and make sure to restrict access to them.
Logging a credit card number could be a PCI violation. And if you aren't PCI compliant, you will be charged higher card-processing fees. Either don't log sensitive information, or encrypt your entire log files.
Your idea of "tagging" sensitive information is intriguing. You could have a special data type for Sensitive information, that wrapped the real, underlying data type. Whenever this object is rendered as a character string, it just returns "***" or whatever.
However, this could require widespread coding changes, and requires a level of concious vigilance similar to that needed to avoid logging sensitive information in the first place.
In your example, you should be encrypting the credit card number or, better yet, not even storing it in the first place.
If, say, you were logging something else, like a login, you might want to explicitly replace a password with *****.
However, this manages to neatly avoid answering the question you've posed in the first place. In general, when dealing with sensitive information, it should be encrypted on its way to any form of permanent storage, be it a database file or a log file. Assume that a Bad Guy is going to be able to get their hands on either, and protect the information accordingly.
If you know what you're trying to filter, you may run you log output through a Regex cleaning expression before you log it.
Regarding SQL statements specifically, if your language supports it, you should be using parameters instead of putting values in the statement itself. In other words:
select * from customers where credit_card = ?
Then set the parameter to the credit card number.
Of course, if you plan to log SQL statements with parameters filled in, you'd need some other way to filter out sensitive data.
Refer this tool, created exactly for this use case.
If you want to mask only selected field, during logging and keep other field values as is. you can try this.
https://github.com/senthilaru/sp-util
<dependency>
<groupId>com.immibytes</groupId>
<artifactId>sp-utils</artifactId>
<version>1.0.0-RELEASE</version>
</dependency>
I have a mostly desktop programming background. In my spare time I dabble in web development, page faulting my way from problem to solution with some success. I have reached the point were I need to allow site logins and collect some data from a community of users (that is the plan anyway).
So, I realize there is a whole world of nefarious users out there who are waiting eagerly for an unsecured site to decorate, vandalize and compromise. If I am really lucky, a couple of those users might make their way to my site. I would like to be reasonably prepared for them.
I have a UI to collect information from a logged in user and some of that information is rendered into HTML pages. My site is implemented with PHP/MySQL on the back end and some javascript stuff on the front. I am interested in any suggestions/advice on how I should tackle any of the following issues:
Cross Site Scripting : I am hoping this will be reasonably simple for me since I am not supporting marked down input, just plain text. Should I be just scanning for [A-Za-z ]* and throwing everything else out? I am pretty ignorant about the types of attacks that can be used here, so I would love to hear your advice.
SQL injection : I am using parametized queries (mysqli) here , so I am hoping I am OK in this department. Is there any extra validation I should be doing on the user entered data to protect myself?
Trollish behaviour : I am supporting polylines drawn by the user on a Google Map, so (again if I am lucky enough to get some traffic) I expect to see a few hand drawn phallices scrawled across western Europe. I am planning to implement some user driven moderation (flag inaproriate SO style), but I would be interested in any other suggestions for discouraging this kind of behavior.
Logins : My current login system is a pretty simple web form, MySQL query in PHP, mp5 encoded password validation, and a stored session cookie. I hope the system is simple enough to be secure, but I wonder if their are vulnerabilies here I am not aware of?
I hope I haven't been too verbose here and look forward to hearing your comments.
Your first problem is that you are concerned with your UI. A simple rule to follow is that you should never assume the submitted data is coming from a UI that you created. Don't trust the data coming in, and sanitize the data going out. Use PHP's strip_tags and/or htmlentities.
Certain characters (<,>,",') can screw up your HTML and permit injection, but should be allowed. Especially in passwords. Use htmlentities to permit the use of these characters. Just think about what would happen if certain characters were output without being "escaped".
Javascript based checks and validation should only be used to improve the user experience (i.e. prevent a page reload). Do not use eval except as an absolute last resort.
Cross Site Scripting can be easily taken care of with htmlentities, there is also a function called strip tags which removes the tags from the post and you'll note that this allows you to whitelist certain tags. If you do decide to allow specific tags through in the future keep in mind that the attributes on these tags are not cleaned in any way, this can be used to insert javascript in the page (onClick etc.) and is not really recommended. If you want to have formatting in the future I'd recommend implementing a formatting language (like [b] for bold or something similar) to stop your users from just entering straight html into the page.
SQL Injection is also easily taken care of as you can prepare statements and then pass through the user data as arguments to the prepared statement. This will stop any user input from modifying the sql statement.
CSRF (Cross-Site Request Forgery) is an often overlooked vulnerability that allows an attacker to submit data from a victims account using the form. This is usually done either by specifying your form get string for an img src (the image loads for the victim, the get loads and the form is processed, but the user is unaware ). Additionally if you use post the attacker can use javascript to auto-submit a hidden form to do the same thing as above. To solve this one you need to generate a key for each form, keep one in the session and one on the form itself (as a hidden input). When the form is submitted you compare the key from the input with the key in the session and only continue if they match.
Some security companies also recommend that you use the attribute 'autocomplete="off"' on login forms so the password isn't saved.
Against XSS htmlspecialchars is pretty enough, use it to clear the output.
SQL injection: if mysql parses your query before adds the parameters, afaik its not possible to inject anything malicious.
I would look into something else besides only allowing [A-Za-z]* into your page. Just because you have no intention of allowing any formatting markup now doesn't mean you won't have a need for it down the line. Personally I hate rewriting things that I didn't design to adapt to future needs.
You might want to put together a whitelist of accepted tags, and add/remove from that as necessary, or look into encoding any markup submitted into plain text.