Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: Environment for testing WebApp Security Scanners |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 8 Aug 2006 20:01:36 -0400 |
-dhs
On Aug 8, 2006, at 7:25 PM, mikeiscool wrote:
On 8/9/06, Dean H. Saxe <dean@fullfrontalnerdity.com> wrote:Just remember, some vendors put in signatures specifically for apps like this that they know will be tested.
I spoke with some folks at Blackhat last week from one of the tool vendors that admitted they don't find all the vulnerabilities in HacmeBank. Why? Because bypassing the login form using SQL injection may require you to throw away the cookies which maintain the login attempts state information. For instance, if you try SQL injection too many times and fail to login with those attempts, a cookie which controls the remaining number of login attempts will force all further attempts to fail. Of course, a human would delete the login attempt counter cookie and solve the problem quite simply.
I see this as a major weakness of these types of tools. Developers store all kinds of crap in cookies, without a good analysis of the cookies by a human, how do we know when deleting this information will adversely affect the application's security? This is not an edge case where such tools scan. Its a very commonly revealed vulnerability in my web app pen testing and code review experience.
(FWIW I work for Foundstone.)
Surely it'd be trivial to have a cookie specification field of the scanning tool. The person doing the scanning could review the cookie and spec it up a bit. Then the tool could be a bit context aware, at least of cookies, and watch when fields it may be interested in changes.
I.e. you could draw links between cookie items and pages, or cookie items and request fields, etc, etc, etc.
The tool could start to learn common cookie forms and use that to help suggest what various fields might be.
-dhs
Dean H. Saxe, CISSP, CEH dean@fullfrontalnerdity.com Here in America everything is bought and sold, you can get anything for little bits of gold. We'll rape the earth and ruin the air, cut down every tree from here to there. -- Donna The Buffalo "America"
-- mic
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: Watchfire
| Previous by Date: | Re: Environment for testing WebApp Security Scanners, Gerald Quakenbush |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Environment for testing WebApp Security Scanners, Mark Curphey |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Environment for testing WebApp Security Scanners, mikeiscool |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Environment for testing WebApp Security Scanners, mikeiscool |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |