Best of Application Security (Friday, Dec. 25)

Ten of Application Security industry's coolest, most interesting, important, and entertaining links from the past week -- in no particular order.

• Web-Based Worms: How XSS Is Paving the Way for Future Malware
• Best Security Improvements in 2009?
• Securing tomcat
• Microsoft IIS vuln leaves users open to remote attack
• My Gmail Account and Google Apps Got Hacked
• Is code auditing of open source apps necessary before deployment?
• An Unpleasant Anniversary: 11 Years of SQL Injection
• Bypassing the intent of blocking "third-party" cookies
• Serious web vuln found in 8 million Flash files
• BSIMM Data Show an SSG is a Software Security Necessity

(Fortify + WhiteHat = Fortify on Demand) or (1 + 1 = 3)

In case you haven’t seen the news, Fortify recently launched a one-stop SaaS shop (Fortify on Demand) for software security testing (support for Java, .NET, and PHP). This snippet from their site spells the offering out nicely:

“Fortify on Demand is a set of hosted Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions that allow any organization to test and score the security of all software with greater speed and accuracy. This automated turnkey service offers an efficient way to test third-party application security or to complete baseline assessments of all internal applications. It is the only offering available on the market that correlates best-of-breed static and dynamic analysis into a single dashboard. Fortify on Demand's robust reports prioritize vulnerabilities fixes based on severity and exploitability, with line of code level details.”

The static analysis technology obviously comes from the market leader’s SCA product line, but guess who’s behind the dynamic part. Give up? :) That would be WhiteHat Security of course!

“Fortify selected WhiteHat Sentinel because it is the only software-as-a-service (SaaS) solution to deliver the highly accurate, verified vulnerability data required to ensure effective website security and actionable information for both developers and security operations as a service.”

Needless to say we are very excited! This technology combination and delivery model addresses a number of under-served customer use-cases, such as third-party validation and testing of COTS. As I’ve blogged before, it’s time to move beyond the nonsensical adversarial debates about which testing methodology (black or white) is best and instead focus on the synergies. We’re putting our R&D money where are mouths are and have grand plans to directly benefit our customers.

Today’s integration is already yielding a solid level of vulnerability correlation, right down to a line or code block, which helps prioritize findings into actionable results -- such as what vulnerabilities are confidently exploitable. Looking ahead, consider that static analysis can measure exactly how code coverage is being realized during the dynamic analysis -- furthermore pointing out the gaps in unlinked URLs, back doors, extra form parameters, etc. This will lead to way better and measurable comprehensiveness for both static and dynamic analysis. And don’t even get me started on the metrics we’ll be able to gather. We’re just at the beginning of understanding what is possible!

This will be the basis of Jacob West and my “Fortify on Demand Launch Webinar” (Jan 14.) and RSA presentation “Best of Both Worlds: Correlating Static and Dynamic Analysis Results” (Mar. 4). We’ll be learning a lot in the coming months and will be ready to share our discoveries with the audience.

Best of Application Security (Friday, Dec. 18)

Ten of Application Security industry's coolest, most interesting, important, and entertaining links from the past week -- in no particular order. Regularly released until year end. Then the Best of Application Security 2009 will be selected!

• Cross-domain search timing
• HPP -- What is it, and what types of attacks does it augment?
• RockYou Hack: From Bad To Worse
• Attention security researchers! Submit your new 2009 Web Hacking Techniques
• Data collector threatens scribe who reported breach
• Akamai Implements WAF
• Why Microsoft should consider retroactively installing AdBlocking software by default
• XSS Embedded iFrames
• Testing for SSL renegotiation
• DefendTheApp - An OWASP AppSensor Project
• Easily View Hidden Facebook Photo Albums

Attention security researchers! Submit your new 2009 Web Hacking Techniques

Update 01.04.2010: Voting process is commencing this week! Expert judges are Rich Mogull, Dinis Cruz, Chris Hoff, HD Moore, Billy Rios, Dan Kaminsky, Romain Gaucher, Steven Christey, Jeff Forristal, and Michal Zalewski.

Update: Awesome news, Black Hat is generously sponsoring the effort! The researcher topping the list will be awarded a free pass to attend the BlackHat USA Briefings 2010!

Just 2 weeks left in 2009. Time to start collecting all the latest published research in preparation for the coveted Top Ten Web Hacking Techniques list!

Every year Web security community produces dozens of new hacking techniques documented in white papers, blog posts, magazine articles, mailing list emails, etc. We are not talking about individual vulnerability instances with CVE numbers, nor intrusions / incidents, but the actual new methods of Web attack. Some target the website, some target the browser, or somewhere in between.

Historically many of these works would permanently reside in obscure and overlooked corners of the Web. Now it its fourth year the list provides a centralized reference point and recognizes researchers who have contributed to the advancement of our industry.

The top ten winners will be selected by a panel of judges (names to be announced soon) on the basis of novelty, potential impact, and overall pervasiveness. Those researchers topping the list can expect to receive praise amongst their peers as have those in past years (2006, 2007, 2008).

Then coming up at IT-Defense (Feb.) and RSA USA 2010 (Mar.) it will be my great honor to introduce each of the top ten during my “2010: A Web Hacking Odyssey” presentations. Each technique will be described in technical detail for how they work, what they can do, who they affect, and how best to defend against them. Audiences get an opportunity to better understand the newest attacks believed most likely to be used against us in the future.

To make all this happen we are going to need a lot of help from the community. At the bottom of this post will be the living master list of everything published. If anything is missing, and we know for a fact there is, please comment containing the link to the research. We understand that while not every technique is as powerful as another, please make every effort to include them anyway, nothing should be considered too insignificant. You never know what method might be found useful another researcher down the road.

Thank you and good luck!


The Complete List

1. Persistent Cookies and DNS Rebinding Redux
2. iPhone SSL Warning and Safari Phishing
3. RFC 1918 Blues
4. Slowloris HTTP DoS
5. CSRF And Ignoring Basic/Digest Auth
6. Hash Information Disclosure Via Collisions - The Hard Way
7. Socket Capable Browser Plugins Result In Transparent Proxy Abuse
8. XMLHTTPReqest “Ping” Sweeping in Firefox 3.5+
9. Session Fixation Via DNS Rebinding
10. Quicky Firefox DoS
11. DNS Rebinding for Credential Brute Force
12. SMBEnum
13. DNS Rebinding for Scraping and Spamming
14. SMB Decloaking
15. De-cloaking in IE7.0 Via Windows Variables
16. itms Decloaking
17. Flash Origin Policy Issues
18. Cross-subdomain Cookie Attacks
19. HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP)
20. How to use Google Analytics to DoS a client from some website.
21. Our Favorite XSS Filters and how to Attack them
22. Location based XSS attacks
23. PHPIDS bypass
24. I know what your friends did last summer
25. Detecting IE in 12 bytes
26. Detecting browsers javascript hacks
27. Inline UTF-7 E4X javascript hijacking
28. HTML5 XSS
29. Opera XSS vectors
30. New PHPIDS vector
31. Bypassing CSP for fun, no profit
32. Twitter misidentifying context
33. Ping pong obfuscation
34. HTML5 new XSS vectors
35. About CSS Attacks
36. Web pages Detecting Virtualized Browsers and other tricks
37. Results, Unicode Left/Right Pointing Double Angel Quotation Mark
38. Detecting Private Browsing Mode
39. Cross-domain search timing
40. Bonus Safari XXE (only affecting Safari 4 Beta)
41. Apple's Safari 4 also fixes cross-domain XML theft
42. Apple's Safari 4 fixes local file theft attack
43. A more plausible E4X attack
44. A brief description of how to become a CA
45. Creating a rogue CA certificate
46. Browser scheme/slash quirks
47. Cross-protocol XSS with non-standard service ports
48. Forget sidejacking, clickjacking, and carjacking: enter “Formjacking”
49. MD5 extension attack
50. Attack - PDF Silent HTTP Form Repurposing Attacks
51. XSS Relocation Attacks through Word Hyperlinking
52. Hacking CSRF Tokens using CSS History Hack
53. Hijacking Opera’s Native Page using malicious RSS payloads
54. Millions of PDF invisibly embedded with your internal disk paths
55. Exploiting IE8 UTF-7 XSS Vulnerability using Local Redirection
56. Pwning Opera Unite with Inferno’s Eleven
57. Using Blended Browser Threats involving Chrome to steal files on your computer
58. Bypassing OWASP ESAPI XSS Protection inside Javascript
59. Hijacking Safari 4 Top Sites with Phish Bombs
60. Yahoo Babelfish - Possible Frame Injection Attack - Design Stringency
61. Gmail - Google Docs Cookie Hijacking through PDF Repurposing & PDF
62. IE8 Link Spoofing - Broken Status Bar Integrity
63. Blind SQL Injection: Inference thourgh Underflow exception
64. Exploiting Unexploitable XSS
65. Clickjacking & OAuth
66. Google Translate - Google User Content - File Uploading Cross - XSS and Design Stringency - A Talk
67. Active Man in the Middle Attacks
68. Cross-Site Identification (XSid)
    
69. Microsoft IIS with Metasploit evil.asp;.jpg
70. MSWord Scripting Object XSS Payload Execution Bug and Random CLSID Stringency
71. Generic cross-browser cross-domain theft
72. Popup & Focus URL Hijacking
73. Advanced SQL injection to operating system full control (whitepaper)
74. Expanding the control over the operating system from the database
75. HTML+TIME XSS attacks
76. Enumerating logins via Abuse of Functionality vulnerabilities
77. Hellfire for redirectors
78. DoS attacks via Abuse of Functionality vulnerabilities
79. URL Spoofing vulnerability in bots of search engines (#2)
80. URL Hiding - new method of URL Spoofing attacks
81. Exploiting Facebook Application XSS Holes to Make API Requests
82. Unauthorized TinyURL URL Enumeration Vulnerability
    
    
    

Why Microsoft should consider retroactively installing AdBlocking software by default

I’ve been following the developments of Google Android and Chrome OS with much interest lately. Less from a security/technology perspective and more as a lesson in business. One way Google is expanding Android’s presence in the mobile market is by sharing ad revenue with mobile carriers (ie Verizon). Instead of incurring software licensing costs (of BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, Palm OS, etc) carriers may receive revenue when their Android users click on ads. Carriers love this because they get paid to install an OS rather than the other way around! This business model has been called “Less Than Free” and Microsoft should take notice of it because their Windows / Office business model could be at huge long-term risk. Let me explain.

Microsoft obviously makes significant revenue OEMing Windows to PC manufactures (Dell, etc.). At the same time Microsoft feels some level of price pressure from free good-enough operating systems like Linux installed on ultra cheap PCs. Now imagine for a moment if Google decided to leverage Less Than Free for Chrome OS. Google could feasibly pay PC manufactures to install Chrome OS through an advertising revenue sharing program. PC Manufactures, instead of paying a fee to MS for Windows, get access to a new revenue stream when Chrome OS users click on ads. Additionally, my understanding is you can’t install desktop software on Chrome OS so the huge money maker that is Microsoft Office is gone on that footprint as well. Such movements would not happen overnight, but the writing is on the wall.

Microsoft is of course not without options when it comes to aggressively fending off the Google powerhouse. One way is that Microsoft could leverage their dominant (50%+) Internet Explorer browser market share. They could use Windows Update to retroactively install ad blocking software as a “security feature,” like AdBlocker Plus on Firefox, in all IE versions (6-8). No doubt users the world over would love it! Less annoying ads, less malware distribution (much of which spread by online ads), and a snappier Web experience! How could Google complain, they are all about speed right? :) Oh, right, because it would cut Google and their dual-revenue stream (AdSense / AdWords) off at the knees.

Many users, even Firefox users, might actually flock to Internet Explorer if they knew this feature was available! Most don’t even know AdBlocker Plus exists. This new ad blocking “security improvement” may also pressure Firefox, the other major browser, to do the same as not wanting to be one-up by MS in the security dept. At least one Mozilla exec is encouraging the use of Bing. Giorgio speculates that is might be why Google Chrome doesn’t have NoScript-like support yet, because they can’t figure out how to do it without enabling effective ad blocking. Makes sense.

Sure, Web publishers whose life blood is ad revenue would hate Microsoft, at least temporarily -- but fear not! Those billions in advertising dollars flowing to Google would still need to land somewhere, but where!? MS could open a “blessed” safe, secure, and user targeted advertiser network! So if Google, or anyone else, wants their ads shown to an IE audience they’d have to pay a tax to MS for the privilege. Still I’ve long wondered by pay-wall Web publishers didn’t heavily advocate the use of ad blockers to put pressure on their free content competitors.

I’ve also glossed over a number of important factors that come into play should any of this play out, like antitrust, but Microsoft is presently is 1-0 so maybe that possibility doesn’t scare them. Meanwhile during whatever legal proceedings, Google would be sucking wind revenue wise. As I wrap up this post, please keep in mind that I’m no industry analyst, just a curious observer who hasn’t vetted their ideas nearly enough.

Best of Application Security (Friday, Dec. 11)

Ten of Application Security industry's coolest, most interesting, important, and entertaining links from the past week -- in no particular order. Regularly released until year end. Then the Best of Application Security 2009 will be selected!

• Why Chrome has No NoScript
• Cross-domain search timing
• A checklist approach to security code reviews
• Potent malware link infects almost 300,000 webpages
• HTML5 new XSS vectors
• Pentagon Web Site Vulnerabilities Identified and Perspective on Pentagon "Pwnage"
• Cross-Site Request Forgery For POST Requests With An XML Body
• Security in Syndicated and Federated Systems
• IP Spoofing
• How fake sites trick search engines to hit the top

Best of Application Security (Friday, Dec. 4)

Ten of Application Security industry's coolest, most interesting, important, and entertaining links from the past week -- in no particular order. Regularly released until year end. Then the Best of Application Security 2009 will be selected!

• Seamless iframes + CSS3 selectors = bad idea
• Error Handling using the OWASP ESAPI
• Real World Security: Ed Bellis on Web-based Business and Software Security
• What's powering Web apps: Google waving goodbye to Gears, hello to HTML5
• DNS Rebinding Video
• Vulnerability remediation done right and done wrong
• HTTP parser for intrusion detection and web application firewalls
• Unu Cracks a Wall Street Journal Conference Site, Not WSJ.com
• CSRF Isn't Just For Access
• Frightened by Links