Re: The Dangers of Allowing Users to Post Images

From: David Dreezer (bugtraqat_private)
Date: Thu Jun 14 2001 - 16:27:58 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Lambert: "Re: The Dangers of Allowing Users to Post Images"

    > This exploit shows how almost any script that 
    uses cookie session/login data
    > to validate CGI forms can be exploited if the 
    users can post images.
    > 
    > One of our developers, Chris 'stallion' Lambert 
    ( clambertat_private ),
    > discovered this exploit in a routine internal 
    security audit.
    > 
    > Allowing users to post inline images is 
    potentially a bad thing. Having the
    > user authentication based solely on cookies is 
    another potentially bad
    > thing. When you put them together, it gets a 
    whole lot worse. I will explain
    > this problem with reference to a typical forum 
    system, but naturally, it can
    > be extended to almost any other CGI script, not 
    just limited to PHP scripts.
    > We have also tested this with Infopop's Ultimate 
    Bulletin Board 6.04e,
    > ezboard 6.2 and WWW Threads PHP 5.4, and at the 
    time of writing, all three
    > were susceptible to attack.
    > 
    > What is the problem? Well, by using an [img] (or 
    HTML <img> or <iframe> or
    > <script src="">) tag, the user is having anyone 
    who views the thread access
    > that image - that is perform an HTTP GET on the 
    URL specified for the image.
    > Even if its not an image, it still can be 
    accessed, but will display a
    > broken image. This means that the user can put a 
    CGI script inside [img]
    > tags. This script will be called by whoever 
    views that thread. When used
    > maliciously, it could force the user to: 
    unknowingly update their profile,
    > respond to polls in a certain way, post new 
    messages or threads, email a
    > user with whatever text they want, the list goes 
    on. This would be
    > particularly worrying for a 'worm' to spread 
    through a forum, filling it
    > with rubbish posts.
    > 
    > For example, if a user posted something along 
    these lines:
    > 
    [img]http://your.forums/forums/newreply.cgi?action
    =newthread&subject=aaa&bod
    > y=some+naughty+words&submit=go[/img]
    > Then the post would go through, under the name 
    of whoever viewed the image.
    > This is of particular danger when an 
    administrator views an image, which
    > then calls a page in an online control panel - 
    thus granting the user access
    > to the control panel.
    > 
    > How can it be fixed? Well, there are a couple of 
    ways to stop it, but the
    > easiest (in PHP at least) seems to be to have 
    most of the variables used by
    > scripts be used through $HTTP_POST_VARS. So 
    instead of checking for $action
    > in a script, $HTTP_POST_VARS['action'] would be 
    checked. This forces the
    > user to use a POST request, not a GET. 
    Alternatively, the sessionid could be
    > required to come with the GET/POST request 
    variables, rather than by cookie.
    > Finally, in the specific case of [img] tags, the 
    use of ? or & in the img
    > URL can be disabled by some regexes.
    > 
    > If the software that you run is not secure, we 
    recommend that you disable
    > HTML and/or [img] tags, until the fixes have 
    been implemented.
    > 
    > Known Vulnerable: Infopop's UBB 6.04e (probably 
    the whole 6.xx series),
    > ezboard 6.2, WWW Threads PHP 5.4, vBulletin 
    2.0.0 Release Candidate 2 and
    > before (later versions are safe). Probably many 
    more bulletin boards and CGI
    > scripts out there, but those are the main ones 
    that we have been tested
    > positive.
    > 
    > 
    > John Percival
    > Product Manager, vBulletin
    > 
    > http://www.vbulletin.com/
    > mailto:johnat_private
    > 
    > "vBulletin: Community Instantly"
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Copyright 2001 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd
    > 
    >
     
    Infopop Corporation's current version of the 
    Ultimate Bulletin Board™ Version, 6.04f (released 
    06-12-2001 05:58 PM), does not have this 
    vulnerability. Our OpenTopic™ product has never 
    had this vulnerability.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jun 15 2001 - 11:19:18 PDT