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  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: abaker at (ASB)
Subject: Possibly a stupid question RPC over HTTP

You need protocol level inspection (i.e. beyond SPI) if you're going
to monitor that kind of traffic.

Also, the support for RPC over HTTP (should really be HTTPS) is not as
open ended as you might fear.

Look at the following:

  Cheap, Fast, Secure -- Pick Any TWO.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:41:56 -0700, Daniel Sichel
<> wrote:
> This may just reflect my ignorance, but I read (and found hard to
> believe) that Microsoft has implemented RPC over HTTP. Is this not a
> HUGE security hole? If I understand it correctly it means that good old
> HTML or XML can invoke a process using standard web traffic (port 80)?
> Is there any permission checking done? what things can be invoked by RPC
> over HTTP? Jeeze, to me it looks like the barn door is now wide open. Am
> I right, and if so, how can I detect RPCs in web traffic to block this
> junk? Can ANY stateful packet filter see this stuff or is the pattern
> too broad in allowed RPCs?
> Again, I hope this is not a stupid question or inappropriate format for
> this, as somebody else recently said, there is already enough noise on
> this list. I would hate to see this list degenerate, it has been REALLY
> valuable to me as a network engineer on occaison.
> Thanks all,
> Dan Sichel
> Ponderosa telephone

Powered by blists - more mailing lists