full-disclosure - Re: Is OWASP vulnerable ??

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]

Message-Id: <200703102151.l2ALppgK025913@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 16:51:51 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Paul Schmehl <pauls@...allas.edu>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Is OWASP vulnerable ??

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 15:15:54 CST, Paul Schmehl said:
> Given the syntax of this function, wgBreakFrames can only have one of two
> values: true or false.
> 
> I'd be interested to see some POC that would show how you would exploit
> this.

The first thing to do is abuse the variable. In addition to true and false, try
3, 0 , -37, "Cabbage", and maybe "true) and (my_evil_function()))". See if you
can force it to throw a syntax error that creates a 404 page or something that
contains *other* input you control, especially if it finds its way to an eval().

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/