bugtraq - Re: An Alternate View of Recently Reported PHP Vulnerabilities

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <521951105.20030405092237@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 09:22:37 +0200
From: dullien@....de
To: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...us.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: An Alternate View of Recently Reported PHP Vulnerabilities

Hey Steven , all,

SMC> How many people who audit PHP applications verify that the second
SMC> argument to str_repeat() is valid?

Nobody, because the misbehaviour of this given function is a _bug_ and
thus not documented. Without documenting the valid input ranges, there
can be no "validation", only "guessing that this is now valid".

SMC> How many otherwise innocent functions in PHP can have unexpected
SMC> results if an attacker can control one of the parameters?

Expect the same to hold true for almost any other language. The libc's
these days are relatively "bug-free", but the libraries of PHP etc.
have not undergone the same amount of auditing.

SMC> And maybe entire classes of vulnerabilities that are assumed to be
SMC> specific to a particular language, aren't.

Any vulnerability existing in C is very likely going to occur in other
languages which (in the end) chain down to C-like code.

Cheers,
dullien
PS: Let us please just keep the entire Java discussion out of this :)

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüssen
dullien@....de                            mailto:dullien@....de