Do all mainstream browsers use host headers when sending HTTP requests? - django

My server is mapped to 2 domain names, and I want to return different web pages when a user is visiting the home page, based on which domain name is used.
Django has a get_host() function in request object, Django doc:
get_host() Returns the originating host of the request using information from the HTTP_X_FORWARDED_HOST (if USE_X_FORWARDED_HOST is enabled) and HTTP_HOST headers, in that order. If they don’t provide a value, the method uses a combination of SERVER_NAME and SERVER_PORT as detailed in PEP 3333.
I am not sure if every mainstream browsers respect these headers.
Can I rely on this function to tell me which domain name is the user visiting?

Yes, all mainstream browsers send the Host header as it is mandatory for all requests sent via HTTP/1.1. Many HTTP/1.0 clients also support this header.

Related

Set-Cookie from a server to an XHR client in a different domain, setting the domain to the client's domain, should it work?

tl;dr, an XHR client in domain A is sending a request to a server in domain B, server responds with a Set-Cookie with Domain=A (the client's domain, the XHR's Origin), all CORS headers set correctly, should it work?
It's well known that one can't set a cookie to another domain. ( How to set a cookie for another domain
However given the following scenario:
Actors:
Client in domain A, a web based client
Server in domain B, setup with CORS headers permitting A as origin, including Access-Control-Allow-Credentials set to true
Communication flow 1 (baseline):
Client is issuing a simple GET request to the Server
Server responds with a cookie, and sets the Domain property to be of the server (Domain=B)
Client is sending another HXR request and has withCredentials=true
The cookie is sent back to the server without any issues
Note: the cookie sent in step #1 is not showing in document.cookies, even if it was not set as httpOnly (since it doesn't
belong to the client's domain). Also attempts to get it from the xhr
via looking at the "Set-Cookie" header, you'll be blocked, by design:
https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#forbidden-response-header-name it will
even won't show in Chrome dev tools under the network tab! but it will
still be sent)
Communication flow 2 (my question):
Client is issuing a simple GET request to the Server
Server responds with a cookie, but sets the Domain property to be of the client (Domain=A)
Client is sending an HXR request and has withCredentials=true
The cookie is not sent back and doesn't seem to be stored anywhere
Why am I a bit surprised? Since the XHR origin is A and it requests something that sets the cookie to domain A (if I look in Postman I clearly see the Set-Cookie header being sent with Domain being the same as the request's Origin), and I have the most permissive CORS setting for that, what's the reasoning behind not letting me do it? (I was expecting it to fail, but still made me wonder)
Questions
Where is the best place in the spec/RFC that it clarifies that this won't work also for XHR where the cookie Domain equals the Origin
What is the attack vector in scenario 2 if theoretically the browser did allow the server to store the cookie if and only if the Origin is the same as the cookie Domain and the CORS origin allows that Origin.
Is there another way to make it work? Maybe it works but my POC was setup incorrectly?
Appendix: Reasoning
I'm looking for a way to have a cross origin CSRF using something like the Cookie to header token method, but due to the cross origin issue, it seems that it's impossible. The only workaround I thought of is sending the CSRF token as a header from the server, then the client can just save it as a cookie it can access later, is there any other way to do it? Is this considered secure?
A resource can only set cookies for its host's registrable domain. If Facebook were to use Google Fonts, and Google could use that to override Facebook cookies, that'd be pretty disastrous.
As for where this is defined, step 5 and 6 of https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6265#section-5.3 handle this. (Fetch largely defers to this RFC when it comes to interpreting the Set-Cookie header on responses.)

Localhost 8080 is not allowed 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin'

Building the app and running on the iPhone device gives the following errors:
I managed to get the details of the request sent from iOS Device, please check the below image is the request is valid or we need to do change something related to sending requests because there is no other place we can make any changes except the way we are sending requests
Header sending in the request is showing here:
To enable cross-origin requests, the server that is responding to the request needs to set headers that will tell the requesting browser (which is on a different domain) that it is allowed to load the resource from the different domain. Essentially, on the server (localhost) you will need add the headers to essentially white-list the calling domain as one that is allowed to fetch resources cross domain.
This is a useful article to help you ramp: https://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/cors/
Also see http://excellencenodejsblog.com/handing-cors-for-your-mobile-app/

cookie issue with same domain same port but different path

I have a situation where my web application will respond with cookie Rules=abcdefg for each request.
Request 1:
http : //hostname:8080/teja/axftyo (for this request I am setting cookie path as below, response from server)
Set-Cookie: Rules=HCE0F290B77137721C2F6107DD4B62F28;Path="/teja/axftyo"
Request 2:
http : //hostname:8080/teja/bcdefg
I assume that for request 2 Rules cookie should not be sent, but still the browser is sending this cookie in to the server.
How can I achieve the functionality of browser sending different cookies based on the path (/bcdefg) rather by my application name /teja
Thank you.
Cookie paths only work on a directory level. /dir/a and /dir/b are considered to be in the same scope for cookies.
/dir/a/ and /dir/b/, on the other hand, are distinguishable, so you could consider adding trailing slashes to your URLs.

Is Host header poisoning possible in such case?

Django team considers host header poisoning (CVE-2011-4139 and CVE-2012-4520) as a security issue that must be resolved at a framework level. Pyramid, for instance (that is, its underlying low-level request wrapper—webob) does not consider this as an issue.
On production & development machines I have nginx which seems to pass correct SERVER_NAME even if Host header contains complete garbage, and responds with 444 No response if there is no matching server_name.
Question: should I worry about Host header poisoning in such case, if I use SERVER_NAME to build absolute URLs?
If you use nginx to sanitize the HTTP_HOST and SERVER_NAME fields, you are doing the right thing and do not need to worry about Host header poisining.
Like Django, Pyramid considers a large part of this the task of the WSGI host environment. And nginx does an excellent, battle-hardened job of sanitizing the HTTP request information.

Does every web request send the browser cookies?

Does every web request send the browser's cookies?
I'm not talking page views, but a request for an image, .js file, etc.
Update
If a web page has 50 elements, that is 50 requests. Why would it send the SAME cookie(s) for each request, doesn't it cache or know it already has it?
Yes, as long as the URL requested is within the same domain and path defined in the cookie (and all of the other restrictions -- secure, httponly, not expired, etc) hold, then the cookie will be sent for every request.
As others have said, if the cookie's host, path, etc. restrictions are met, it'll be sent, 50 times.
But you also asked why: because cookies are an HTTP feature, and HTTP is stateless. HTTP is designed to work without the server storing any state between requests.
In fact, the server doesn't have a solid way of recognizing which user is sending a given request; there could be a thousand users behind a single web proxy (and thus IP address). If the cookies were not sent every request, the server would have no way to know which user is requesting whatever resource.
Finally, the browser has no clue if the server needs the cookies or not, it just knows the server instructed it to send the cookie for any request to foo.com, so it does so. Sometimes images need them (e.g., dynamically-generated per-user), sometimes not, but the browser can't tell.
Yes. Every request sends the cookies that belong to the same domain. They're not cached as HTTP is stateless, what means every request must be enough for the server to figure out what to do with it. Say you have images that are only accessible by certain users; you must send your auth cookie with every one of those 50 requests, so the server knows it's you and not someone else, or a guest, among the pool of requests it's getting.
Having said that, cookies might not be sent given other restrictions mentioned in the other responses, such as HTTPS setting, path or domain. Especially there, an important thing to notice: cookies are not shared between domains. That helps with reducing the size of HTTP calls for static files, such as the images and scripts you mentioned.
Example: you have 4 cookies at www.stackoverflow.com; if you make a request to www.stackoverflow.com/images/logo.png, all those 4 cookies will be sent.
However, if you request stackoverflow.com/images/logo.png (notice the subdomain change) or images.stackoverflow.com/logo.png, those 4 cookies won't be present - but maybe those related to these domains will.
You can read more about cookies and images requesting, for example, at this StackOverflow Blog Post.
No. Not every request sends the cookies. It depends on the cookie configuration and client-server connection.
For example, if your cookie's secure option is set to true then it must be transmitted over a secure HTTPS connection. Means when you see that website with HTTP protocol then these cookies won't be sent by browsers as the secure flag is true.
3 years have passed
There's another reason why a browser wouldn't send cookies. You can add a crossOrigin attribute to your <script> tag, and the value to "anonymous". This will prevent cookies to be sent to the destination server. 99.9% of the time, your javascripts are static files, and you don't generate that js code based on the request's cookies. If you have 1KB of cookies, and you have 200 resources on your page, then your user is uploading 200KB, and that might take some time on 3G and have zero effect on the result page. Visit HTML attribute: crossorigin for reference.
Cookie has a "path" property. If "path=/" , the answer is Yes.
I know this is an old thread. But I've just noticed that most browsers won't sent cookies for a domain if you add a trailing dot. For example http://example.com. won't receive cookies set for .example.com. Apache on the other hand treats them as the same host. I find this useful to make cross domain tracking more difficult for external resources I include, but you could also use it for performance reasons. Note this brakes validation of https certificates. I've run a few tests using browsershots and my own devices. The hack works on almost all browsers except for safari (mobile and desktop), which will include cookies in the request.
Short answer is Yes. The below lines are from the JS documentation
Cookies were once used for general client-side storage. While this was legitimate when they were the only way to store data on the client, it is now recommended to use modern storage APIs. Cookies are sent with every request, so they can worsen performance (especially for mobile data connections).