full-disclosure - Google's Blogger.com classic HTTP response splitting vulnerability

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

Message-ID: <20060118105048.GA7330@localhost>
Date: Wed Jan 18 11:33:59 2006
From: meder at o0o.nu (Meder Kydyraliev)
Subject: Google's Blogger.com classic HTTP response
	splitting vulnerability

        Blogger.com classic HTTP response splitting vulnerability
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0. Original Advisory
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://o0o.nu/~meder/o0o_Blogger_HTTP_response_splitting.txt

I. Background
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Blogger.com is Google's blogging service.

II. Description
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Blogger's personal page redirection mechanism contains a classic HTTP
response splitting vulnerability in the "Location" HTTP header. The
problem occurs due to use of unsanitized user-supplied data in the
"Location" HTTP header, which enables attacker to inject CRLF(%0d%0a)
characters thus splitting server's response taking full control over
the contents of second HTTP response. Exploitation of the vulnerability
can lead to cross-site scripting (XSS), cache poisioning and phishing
attacks.

The following URL was taking contents of query string and using it in
"Location" HTTP header without proper sanitation:

http://www.blogger.com/r?[URL here]

III. Vendor status 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Vulnerability has been fixed on 13/01/2006

IV. Disclosure timeline
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

02/01/2006 - Issue discovered. Vendor notified.
02/01/2006 - Initial vendor response.
12/01/2006 - Vendor inquired on status.
13/01/2006 - Vendor response and confirmation that bug fixed.

V. References
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. http://www.packetstormsecurity.org/papers/general/whitepaper_httpresponse.pdf

-- 
http://o0o.nu/~meder