diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'guides/source/security.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | guides/source/security.md | 14 |
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/guides/source/security.md b/guides/source/security.md index 1d0e87d831..f4a9f64669 100644 --- a/guides/source/security.md +++ b/guides/source/security.md @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Web application frameworks are made to help developers build web applications. S In general there is no such thing as plug-n-play security. Security depends on the people using the framework, and sometimes on the development method. And it depends on all layers of a web application environment: The back-end storage, the web server and the web application itself (and possibly other layers or applications). -The Gartner Group however estimates that 75% of attacks are at the web application layer, and found out "that out of 300 audited sites, 97% are vulnerable to attack". This is because web applications are relatively easy to attack, as they are simple to understand and manipulate, even by the lay person. +The Gartner Group, however, estimates that 75% of attacks are at the web application layer, and found out "that out of 300 audited sites, 97% are vulnerable to attack". This is because web applications are relatively easy to attack, as they are simple to understand and manipulate, even by the lay person. The threats against web applications include user account hijacking, bypass of access control, reading or modifying sensitive data, or presenting fraudulent content. Or an attacker might be able to install a Trojan horse program or unsolicited e-mail sending software, aim at financial enrichment or cause brand name damage by modifying company resources. In order to prevent attacks, minimize their impact and remove points of attack, first of all, you have to fully understand the attack methods in order to find the correct countermeasures. That is what this guide aims at. @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ Many web applications have an authentication system: a user provides a user name Hence, the cookie serves as temporary authentication for the web application. Anyone who seizes a cookie from someone else, may use the web application as this user - with possibly severe consequences. Here are some ways to hijack a session, and their countermeasures: -* Sniff the cookie in an insecure network. A wireless LAN can be an example of such a network. In an unencrypted wireless LAN it is especially easy to listen to the traffic of all connected clients. For the web application builder this means to _provide a secure connection over SSL_. In Rails 3.1 and later, this could be accomplished by always forcing SSL connection in your application config file: +* Sniff the cookie in an insecure network. A wireless LAN can be an example of such a network. In an unencrypted wireless LAN, it is especially easy to listen to the traffic of all connected clients. For the web application builder this means to _provide a secure connection over SSL_. In Rails 3.1 and later, this could be accomplished by always forcing SSL connection in your application config file: ```ruby config.force_ssl = true @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ Thus the session becomes a more secure place to store data. The encryption is done using a server-side secret key `secrets.secret_key_base` stored in `config/secrets.yml`. -That means the security of this storage depends on this secret (and on the digest algorithm, which defaults to SHA1, for compatibility). So _don't use a trivial secret, i.e. a word from a dictionary, or one which is shorter than 30 characters, use `rake secret` instead_. +That means the security of this storage depends on this secret (and on the digest algorithm, which defaults to SHA1, for compatibility). So _don't use a trivial secret, i.e. a word from a dictionary, or one which is shorter than 30 characters, use `rails secret` instead_. `secrets.secret_key_base` is used for specifying a key which allows sessions for the application to be verified against a known secure key to prevent tampering. Applications get `secrets.secret_key_base` initialized to a random key present in `config/secrets.yml`, e.g.: @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ Refer to the Injection section for countermeasures against XSS. It is _recommend **CSRF** Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), also known as Cross-Site Reference Forgery (XSRF), is a gigantic attack method, it allows the attacker to do everything the administrator or Intranet user may do. As you have already seen above how CSRF works, here are a few examples of what attackers can do in the Intranet or admin interface. -A real-world example is a [router reconfiguration by CSRF](http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Symantec-reports-first-active-attack-on-a-DSL-router-735883.html). The attackers sent a malicious e-mail, with CSRF in it, to Mexican users. The e-mail claimed there was an e-card waiting for the user, but it also contained an image tag that resulted in a HTTP-GET request to reconfigure the user's router (which is a popular model in Mexico). The request changed the DNS-settings so that requests to a Mexico-based banking site would be mapped to the attacker's site. Everyone who accessed the banking site through that router saw the attacker's fake web site and had their credentials stolen. +A real-world example is a [router reconfiguration by CSRF](http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Symantec-reports-first-active-attack-on-a-DSL-router-735883.html). The attackers sent a malicious e-mail, with CSRF in it, to Mexican users. The e-mail claimed there was an e-card waiting for the user, but it also contained an image tag that resulted in an HTTP-GET request to reconfigure the user's router (which is a popular model in Mexico). The request changed the DNS-settings so that requests to a Mexico-based banking site would be mapped to the attacker's site. Everyone who accessed the banking site through that router saw the attacker's fake web site and had their credentials stolen. Another example changed Google Adsense's e-mail address and password. If the victim was logged into Google Adsense, the administration interface for Google advertisement campaigns, an attacker could change the credentials of the victim.
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ However, the attacker may also take over the account by changing the e-mail addr #### Other -Depending on your web application, there may be more ways to hijack the user's account. In many cases CSRF and XSS will help to do so. For example, as in a CSRF vulnerability in [Google Mail](http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/google-gmail-e-mail-hijack-technique/). In this proof-of-concept attack, the victim would have been lured to a web site controlled by the attacker. On that site is a crafted IMG-tag which results in a HTTP GET request that changes the filter settings of Google Mail. If the victim was logged in to Google Mail, the attacker would change the filters to forward all e-mails to their e-mail address. This is nearly as harmful as hijacking the entire account. As a countermeasure, _review your application logic and eliminate all XSS and CSRF vulnerabilities_. +Depending on your web application, there may be more ways to hijack the user's account. In many cases CSRF and XSS will help to do so. For example, as in a CSRF vulnerability in [Google Mail](http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/google-gmail-e-mail-hijack-technique/). In this proof-of-concept attack, the victim would have been lured to a web site controlled by the attacker. On that site is a crafted IMG-tag which results in an HTTP GET request that changes the filter settings of Google Mail. If the victim was logged in to Google Mail, the attacker would change the filters to forward all e-mails to their e-mail address. This is nearly as harmful as hijacking the entire account. As a countermeasure, _review your application logic and eliminate all XSS and CSRF vulnerabilities_. ### CAPTCHAs @@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ The problem with CAPTCHAs is that they have a negative impact on the user experi Most bots are really dumb. They crawl the web and put their spam into every form's field they can find. Negative CAPTCHAs take advantage of that and include a "honeypot" field in the form which will be hidden from the human user by CSS or JavaScript. -Note that negative CAPTCHAs are only effective against dumb bots and won't suffice to protect critical applications from targeted bots. Still, the negative and positive CAPTCHAs can be combined to increase the performance, e.g., if the "honeypot" field is not empty (bot detected), you won't need to verify the positive CAPTCHA, which would require a HTTPS request to Google ReCaptcha before computing the response. +Note that negative CAPTCHAs are only effective against dumb bots and won't suffice to protect critical applications from targeted bots. Still, the negative and positive CAPTCHAs can be combined to increase the performance, e.g., if the "honeypot" field is not empty (bot detected), you won't need to verify the positive CAPTCHA, which would require an HTTPS request to Google ReCaptcha before computing the response. Here are some ideas how to hide honeypot fields by JavaScript and/or CSS: @@ -787,7 +787,7 @@ The following is an excerpt from the [Js.Yamanner@m](http://www.symantec.com/sec var IDList = ''; var CRumb = ''; function makeRequest(url, Func, Method,Param) { ... ``` -The worms exploits a hole in Yahoo's HTML/JavaScript filter, which usually filters all target and onload attributes from tags (because there can be JavaScript). The filter is applied only once, however, so the onload attribute with the worm code stays in place. This is a good example why blacklist filters are never complete and why it is hard to allow HTML/JavaScript in a web application. +The worms exploit a hole in Yahoo's HTML/JavaScript filter, which usually filters all targets and onload attributes from tags (because there can be JavaScript). The filter is applied only once, however, so the onload attribute with the worm code stays in place. This is a good example why blacklist filters are never complete and why it is hard to allow HTML/JavaScript in a web application. Another proof-of-concept webmail worm is Nduja, a cross-domain worm for four Italian webmail services. Find more details on [Rosario Valotta's paper](http://www.xssed.com/news/37/Nduja_Connection_A_cross_webmail_worm_XWW/). Both webmail worms have the goal to harvest email addresses, something a criminal hacker could make money with. |