full-disclosure - another product affected by recent MS IE '@' patch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: nick at virus-l.demon.co.uk (Nick FitzGerald)
Subject: another product affected by recent MS IE '@'
 patch

mescsa <mescsa@...oo.com> to me:

> > I don't know what you've been
> > smoking/drinking/whatever, but get off it 
> > and go read the relevant RFCs -- 1945 & 2616.  Do
> > _NOT_ be misled by 
> > RFC 2396 -- it is relevant, but largely for the
> > parts of a URI's 
> > general form that are specifically negated in the
> > other RFCs.
> 
> Can you give any hint where to find this vital
> information within RFC 2616? I'm misled, too.

Section 3.2.2:

   http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]]

You then have to refer back to RFC 2396 -- coincidentally also section 
3.2.2 of that RFC -- for the definitions of the component parts "host" 
and "port" ("abs_path", etc are irrelevant to this discussion and 
defined in other sections of 2396).

There you will see that "host" is a sub-part of the "hostport" part of 
the "server" component of generic URIs:

   server        = [ [ userinfo "@" ] hostport ]

   hostport      = host [ ":" port ]

and, most importantly, you should note that the "userinfo" part is 
_outside_ the definition of "hostport", and thus outside the "host" 
part.  Ergo, HTTP URLs are explicitly (and presumably deliberately) 
defined to _NOT_ support "userinfo" data so any implementation that 
does is non-compliant.

Regards,

Nick FitzGerald