On 09/12/2007, Paul Johnston <paj@pajhome.org.uk> wrote:
Hi,
People have talked a lot about storing data on the client and
cryptographically generating cookies.
My recommendation for security is to not do either. All you store on the
client is a session ID - a 128-bit random number (plus a CSRF token
where needed). Any data is stored on the server side, keyed by the
session ID. This is the most secure approach, but it needs a lot of
database access on the server.
Any approach that involves a crypto-generated cookie and such is a
design decision to improve efficiency at some cost to security. Whether
these security issues justify the performance gains will depend on the
application. As a rough guide, I'd say this is unsuitable for anything
that handles money, but probably ok for most other systems.
In terms of session IDs, you can generate these cryptographically, using
a fairly simple formula:
(userid, timestamp, hash(userid + timestamp + server_secret))
Think of this as a token saying "user X logged in at time Y, and this
number Z proves the server authorised it". And this can be done without
any use of a database on the server.
This has two problems:
1) You can't have a proper logout function - the only way a token
expires is when it times out.
2) If the server_secret is leaked, your website security vanishes.
In terms of storing data on the client, in most situations you don't
mind the client seeing this data (it's about them anyway) but you would
want to stop them tampering with it. As such, protecting it with a MAC
(a keyed hash) with the secret kept on the server will work. This
doesn't stop replay attacks, although you could potentially include a
timestamp as well to partially address this. You could also use
encryption to maintain confidentiality of that data.
Yes - in the past I've used
AES( userid + timestamp + HMAC-SHA1( userid + timestamp, secret1), secret2)
or whatever other data you need in there - source IP address as well
in my case. We didn't mind too much about replay attacks, though as
you say, a bank would probably be a lot more concerned. (I would just
say that where possible, it's better to use trusted constructions such
as HMAC.)
I'm no crypto expert, but this should prevent against casual snoopers.
cheers,
Jamie
--
Jamie Riden / jamesr@europe.com / jamie@honeynet.org.uk
UK Honeynet Project: http://www.ukhoneynet.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by: Watchfire
Methodologies & Tools for Web Application Security Assessment
With the rapid rise in the number and types of security threats, web
application security assessments should be considered a crucial phase in the
development of any web application. What methodology should be followed? What
tools can accelerate the assessment process? Download this Whitepaper today!
https://www.watchfire.com/securearea/whitepapers.aspx?id=70170000000940F
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
