Vulnerability reports from PCI-DSS scan - xss

We have had a PCI scan on one of our websites passed on to us by one of our clients. There are a number of reports of vulnerabilities that look something like this:
Network service: 80/443 Application URL:
http://www.oursite.com/signup.php
The response contains SQL Server
errors. This suggests that the
hazardous characters inserted by the
test penetrated the application and
reached the SQL query itself (i.e.
that the application is vulnerable to
SQL Injection).
Summary test information: header: header X-Forwarded-For=%2527
I'm not sure how they are saying they have injected code here?
another example they provide for a different URL with supposedly the same issue has this as the exploit:
Summary test information: header:
header X-Forwarded-For='
EDIT
I've had a look into this header and it seems its only set by Proxy's or Load Balancers (which we dont use anyway). Either way, i've spoofed it myself and there is no vulnerability at our end at all so i'm not sure what they are highlighting. Since we make no use of this header i'm not sure what the supposed point of attack would be anyway?
Another example we have of a so-called vulnerability is this:
Network service: 80/443 Application URL:
http://www.oursite.com/products/product-na-here/370
The test successfully embedded a
script in the response, and it will be
executed once the page is loaded in
the user's browser. This means the
application is vulnerable to
Cross-Site Scripting.
Summary test
information:
path: path
/products/product-na-here/370 ->
/products/product-na-here/370,parameter:
header >'">alert(957652)
Again, i'm not sure what is being flagged here at all?
Thanks.

The scans are automated and can generate false positives. It is to alert you to possibilities of vulnerabilities, and you need to either explain how you aren't vulnerable or close the vulnerabilities. (Assuming you're doing this for PCI compliance audit....if not, then you just try to justify/close them internally.)
The scans are based on the OWASP top 10 vulnerabilities (http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Top_Ten_Project) as mandated by PCI DSS. Take a look there; there are a lot of nice examples and really in-depth explanations of the vulnerabilities.

Another option is to use an ASV that does not provide solely automated results. There are some good ASVs around that take a blended approach to security results. They manually vet to confirm or deny each and every automatically found vulnerability, as well as providing manual testing to find things that only a human reliably can, such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting and sensitive information leakage, amongst many others, always providing clear examples of the attack vectors required.
Full disclosure: I work for an ASV that provides a service similar to what i describe.

As mentioned by other user most PCI scan results seem to flag either false positives or changing practices. I saw one once recommending that we didnt use bind and that allowing FTP access was a major security hole. I would suggest you challenge their findings where you see fit.

Related

Finding EC2 instance ID for someone else's instance

I use a public AMI from a third party which runs an nginx web server, and it uses the EC2 instance ID for the default admin password. I'm trying to think of any vulnerabilities with this, if I do not change the default password. Since the HTTPS server is public, is there any way someone could discover the EC2 instance ID?
I know this can be seen by anyone in my company who has ec2:DescribeInstances permission, but I'm not really concerned about that. I just want to make sure no one outside can find it.
Off the top of my head and without considering any crazy specific scenarios, I do not believe it is possible for one to retrieve this information without exploiting some sort of 0-day vulnerability we presently don't know about.
Now let's stop living in a perfect world and begin to threat model about what could potentially happen.
Depending on the functionality you have going on and some other variables, I don't think it is crazy to think the instance ID could be leaked in some manner. Let's say you exposed a web application and you had some functionality which took user input and did not validate this input, then I could see the instance ID potentially being capable of being leaked.
For all intensive purposes, let's say our host is hosting a web application which analyzes users' LinkedIn profiles and offers them career advice. In addition, let's assume that the web application poorly accepts input and does not validate that a spoofed URL has been provided instead of a LinkedIn URL, and it will provide the response details after it has made a request to the URL provided by the attacker.
Considering all these, if I was an attacker trying to get the instance ID of your host, I would navigate to the part of the web application which accepts my input and I would provide the following input, and considering the scenarios I posed above, an attacker could potentially get the desired information:
http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/instance-id
How I came up with that payload was I looked at:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/instancedata-data-retrieval.html#instance-metadata-ex-1
I believe that if all these prerequisites were met, then this would potentially leak the instance ID.
But until all these scenarios exist, it is not likely. I have seen some web applications which allow you to add an integration to your website poorly validate input given by the user. As such, one can exploit a server side request vulnerability to attack the host.
I hope this is a good explanation of how it could potentially happen, but again, I don't think it is likely.

Naming a SOAP web service endpoint address

I am developing a SOAP interface and am having trouble deciding what to name the endpoint address.
Options:
- {soap,api,service,???}.foo.com.au
- www.foo.com.au/{soap,api,service,???}
What are the typical names that a SOAP service gets?
I would use www.foo.com.au/soap, mostly because it's an easy way to tell people that it's a SOAP service, and if you want to add a REST service later, you can use www.foo.com.au/rest
Keep in mind, in practice, all solutions are technically equivalent. The benefits of one naming system over another are only at the ease or understanding what the URLs are about (for humans), or maintainability, really. So, if you are searching for a standard we can tell, at best:
If you have a big company with lots of applications, go for the http://api.company.com/application/rest and/or http://api.company.com/application/soap approach
Reason: you can separate, right from the start (networkwise) the web service servers (http://api.srv.com/app) from the human web browsing servers (http://www.srv.com/app).
All applications have one big root "meeting" point (the root URL api.company.com), so if anyone wonders what is company-wide available, just check http://api.company.com and it can list all services available.
If your setup is not that big, it is probably not worth the trouble, so don't fear using the www.. But keep in mind it's best to use at least a different context, such as api/, so that anyone knows right off the bat a service URL is about a web service(!): http://www.company.com/application/api/rest / http://www.company.com/application/api/soap
Note: It's also common to use service, although api seems to be somewhat better descriptive (api.something.com leaves no doubt about what that page is about).
Some examples (as you can see, there is really no global standard):
Google's search API: http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/services/search/web?v=1.0&q=test
Twitter's search API: http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q=w00t
Facebook' Graph API: http://graph.facebook.com
Facebook' Dialog API: http://www.facebook.com/dialog (see, no standard even within facebook!)
Weather Gov SOAP forecast: http://www.weather.gov/forecasts/xml/DWMLgen/wsdl/ndfdXML.wsdl
Buy many seem to keep the good ol' company-wide APIs "meeting points":
http://developers.google.com
http://developers.facebook.com
http://dev.twitter.com

How to make sure web services are kept stable from one release to the next?

The company where I work is a software vendor with a suite of applications. There are also a number of web services, and of course they have to be kept stable even if the applications change. We haven't always succeeded with this, and sometimes a customer finds that a service is not behaving as before after upgrading.
We now want to handle this better. In general, web services shouldn't change, and if they have to, at least we will know about it and document the change.
But how do we ensure this? One idea is to compare the WSDL files with the previous versions at every release. That will make sure the interfaces don't change, but it won't detect that the behavior changes, for example if a bug is introduced in some common library.
Another idea is to build up a suite of service tests, for example using soapUI. But then we'll never know if we have covered enough cases.
What are some best practices regarding this?
I think, you can definitely be confident of the stability of the services If you keep updating your service tests with the latest changes in the service and I think this is one of the best practices people use before they deploy.
Also, In general, I think what would probably matter is how well the unit testing is being done by the developers who are writing the components(libraries) used by the services. Are those unit tests being updated with the changes in the components being used by the service.
There as two kinds of changes for a web service, breaking change and non-breaking change. Breaking change is like changing the signature of a web method or changing a datacontract schema. Non-breaking change is like adding a new web method or adding an optional member to a datcontract. In general your client should continue to work with a non-breaking change. I don't know which technology you are using but use versioing in service namespace and datacontract namespace following W3C recommendations. You can even continue to host different versions at different endpoints. This way your clients will break if they try to use a new version of your service without re-generating the proxy from the new version of WSDL or continue to use the old version.
Some WCF specific links are
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731060.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms733832.aspx
I wouldn't consider behaviour change as a change in SOA sense. That is more like fixing defects.
IMO, aside from monitoring the WSDL for changes (which is really only necessary if you have a willy-nilly implementation ("promote-to-production") strategy), the only way to really ensure that everythign is operational and stable, is to perform continuous, automated, periodic, functional testing with a test suite that provides complete coverage of both the WSDL and the underlying application functionality, including edge cases. The test cases should be version controlled just like the app and WSDL, and should be developed in parallel to new versions of the app (not afterward, as a reaction).
This can all be automated with SoapUI. Ideally, logging results somewhere that can be accumulated and reported on some dashboard, so that if somethign breaks, you know when it broke, and hopefully correlate that to an event such as an application update, or something more benign such as a service pack being pushed, electrical work being performed, etc..
However... do as I say, not as I do. I have been unsuccessful in pushing this strategy at work. Your votes will tell me whether I should push harder or do something else!

Web application monitoring best practices [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
We are finishing up our web application and planning for deployment. Very important aspect of deployment to production is monitoring the health of the system. Having a small team of developers/support makes it very critical for us to get the early notifications of potential problems and resolve them before they have impact on users.
Using Nagios seams like a good option, but wanted to get more opinions on what are the best monitoring tools/practices for web application in general and specifically for Django app? Also would welcome recommendations on what should be monitored aside from the obvious CPU, memory, disk space, database connectivity.
Our web app is written in Django, we are running on Linux (Ubuntu) under Apache + Fast CGI with PostgreSQL database.
EDIT
We have a completely virtualized environment under Linode.
EDIT
We are using django-logging so we have a way separate info, errors, critical issues, etc.
Nagios is good, it's good to maybe have system testing (Selenium) running regularily.
Edit: Hyperic and Groundwork also look interesting.
There is probably a test suite system that can keep pressure testing everything as well for you. I can't remember the name off the top of my head, maybe someone can mention one below.
Other things I like to do:
The best motto for infrastructure is always fix, detect, repair. Get it up, get to the root of it, and cure/prevent it if you can.
Since a system exists at many levels, we should test at many levels:
Edit: Have all errors or warnings posted directly to your case manager via email. That way you can track occurrences in one place.
1) Connection : monitor your internet connectivity from the server and from the outside. Log this somewhere
2) Server : monitor all the processes that you need to to ensure they are running and not pinning the server. Use a HP Server or something equivalent with hardware failure notification that it can do from a bios level. Notify and log if they are.
3) Software : Identify the key software that always needs to be running. Set the performance levels if any and then monitor them. Nagios should be able to help with this. On windows it can be a bit more. When an exception occurs, you should be able to run a script from it to restart processes automatically. My dream system is allowing me to interact with servers via SMS if the server sees it as an exception that I have to either permit, or one that will happen automatically unless I cancel by sms. One day..
4) Remote Power : Ensure Remote power-reset capabilities are in your hand. You might want to schedule weekly reboots if you ever use windows for anything.
5) Business Logic Testing : Have regularly running scripts testing the workflow of your system. Selenium can probably achieve some of this, but I like logging the results as well to say this ran at this time and these files had errors. If possible anywhere, have the system monitor itself through your scripts.
6) Backups : Make a backup that you can set and forget. If you can get things into virtual machines it would be ideal as you can scale, move, or deploy any part of your infrastructure anywhere. I have had instances where I moved a dead server onto my laptop, let it run in vmware while I fixed a problem.
Monitoring the number of connections to your Web server and your database is another good thing to track. Chances are if one shoots through the roof, something is starving for resources and the site is about to go down.
Also make sure you have a regular request for a URL that is a reasonable end-to-end test of the system. If your site supports search, then have nagios execute a search - that should make sure the search index is healthy, the Web server and the database server.
Also, make sure that your applications sends you email anytime your users see an error, or there is an unhandled exception. That way you know how the application is failing in the field.
If I had to pick one type of testing it would be to test the end-user functionality of the system. The important thing to consider is the user. While testing things like database availability, server up-time, etc, are all important, testing work-flows through your system via a remote UI testing system covers all these bases. If you know that the critical parts of your system are available to the end-user, then you know your system is prolly Ok.
Identify the important work-flows in your system. For example, if you wrote an eCommerce site you might identify a work-flow of "search for a product, put product in shopping cart, and purchase product".
Prioritize the work-flows, and build out higher-priority tests first. You can always add additional tests after you roll out to production.
Build UI tests using one of the available UI testing frameworks. There are a number of free and commercial UI testing frameworks that can be run in an automated fashion. Build a core set of tests first that address critical work-flows.
Setup at least one remote location from which to run tests. You want to test every aspect of your system, which means testing it remotely. Is the internet connection up? Is the web server running? Is the connection to the database server working? Etc, etc. If you test remotely you make sure you system is available to the outside world which means it is most likely working end-to-end. You can also run these tests internally, but I think it is critical to run them externally.
Make sure your solution includes both reporting and notification. If one of your critical work-flow tests fails, you want someone to know about it to fix the problem ASAP. If a non-critical task fails, perhaps you only want reporting so that you can fix problems out-of-band.
This end-user testing should not eliminate monitoring of system in your data-center, but I want to reiterate that end-user testing is the most important type of testing you can do for a web application.
Ahhh, monitoring. How I love thee and your vibrations at 3am.
Essentially, you need a way to inspect the internal state of your application, both at a specific moment, as well as over spans of time (the latter is very important for detecting problems before they occur). Another way to think of it is as glorified unit-testing.
We have our own (very nice) monitoring system, so I can't comment on Nagios or other apps. Our use case is similar to yours, though (cgi app on apache).
Add a logging.monitor() type method, which will log information to disk. This should support, at the least, logging simple numbers and dicts of numbers (the key=>value association can be incredibly handy).
Have a process that scrapes the monitoring logs and stores them into a database.
Have a process that takes the database information, checks them against rules, and sends out alerts. Keep in mind that somethings can be flaky. Just because you got a 404 once doesn't mean the app it down.
Have a way to mute alerts (very useful for maintenance or to read your email).
Thats all pretty high level. The important thing is that you have a history of the state of the application over time. From this, you can then create rules (perhaps just raw sql queries you put into a config somewhere), that say "If the queries per second doubled, send a SlashDotted alert", or "if 50% of responses are 404, send an alert". It also bedazzles management because you can quantify any comment about whether its up, down, fast, or slow.
Things to monitor include (others probably mentioned these as well): http status, port accessible, http load, database load, open connection, query latency, server accessibility (ssh, ping), queries per second, number of worker processes, error percentage, error rate.
Simple end-to-end tests are also very handy, though they can be brittle. Its best to keep them simple, but you should have one that tries to touch core pieces of the app (caching, database, authentication).
I use Munin and Monit, and have been very happy with both of them.
Internal logging is fine and dandy but when your whole app goes down or your box/enviro crashes you need an outside check too. http://www.pingdom.com/ has been very reliable for me.
My only other advice is I wouldnt spent too much time on this. my best example is twitter, how much energy did they put into the system being able to half-die instead of just investing that time and energy into throwing more hardware / scaling it out.
Chances are what ends up taking you down, your logging and health systems will have missed anyway.
The single most important way to monitor any online site is to monitor externally. The goal should be to monitor your site in a way that most closely reflects how your users use the site. In 99% of cases, as soon as you know that your site is down externally, it's relatively easy to find the root cause. The most important thing is to know as soon as possible that your customers are unable to load your site.
This generally means using an external performance monitoring service. They very from the very low end (mon.itor.us, pingdom) to the high end (Webmetrics, Gomez, Keynote). And as always, you get what you pay for. The things to look for when shopping around for a monitoring service include:
The size and distribution of the monitoring network
Whether or not the monitoring solution is able to monitor your site using a real browser (otherwise you aren't testing your site like a real user would)
The scripting language (to script the transactions against your site)
The support department, to help you along the way, and provide expertise on how to monitor correctly
Good luck!
Web monitoring by IP Patrol or SiteSentry have been useful for us. The second is a bit like site confidence but slightly prettier lol.
Have you thought about monitoring the functionality as well? A script (either in a scripting language like Perl or Pyton or using some tool like WebTest) that talks to your application and does some important steps like logging in, making a purchase, etc is very nice to have.
Aside from what to monitor, which has already been answered, you need to make sure - whatever system you use - that you get only one notification of an error that happens multiple times, on each request. Or your inbox will run out of memory :) Plus, it's plain annoying...
Divide the standby shifts among the support/dev team, so one person does not have to be on call every single evening. That will wear people down. Monitoring is a good thing, but everyone needs to get a chance to have a life once in a while. Your cellphone buzzing at 2AM for a few nights will get very old pretty soon, trust me. And not every developer is used to 24/7 support, so you need to find the balance between using monitoring and abusing monitoring.
Basically, have distinct escalation levels, and if the sky is not falling, define a "serenity now" window at night where smaller escalation levels don't go out.
I've been using Nagios + CruiseControl + Selenium for running high-level tests on mission critical web applications. I got burned pretty hard by a simple jquery error that stopped users from proceding through an online signup form.
http://www.agileatwork.com/the-holy-trinity-of-web-2-0-application-monitoring/
You can take a look at AlertGrid. This web application allows you to filter and forward alerts to your team (worldwide). It has also nice ability to monitor if something did not happen.
To paraphrase Richard Levasseur: ah, monitoring tools, how your imperfections frustrate me. There doesn't seem to be a perfect tool out there; Nagios is pretty easy to set up but the UI is kinda old fashioned and you have to have a daemon running on each server being monitored. Zenoss has a much nicer UI including trend graphs of resource usage, but it uses SNMP so you have to have some familiarity with that to get it working properly, and the documentation is not the best - there are hundreds of pages but it's really hard to find just the info you need to get started.
Friends of mine have also recommended Cacti and Hyperic, but I don't have personal experience with those.
One last thing - one of the other answers suggested running a tool that stresses your site. I wouldn't recommend doing that on your live site unless you have a reliable quiet period when nobody is hitting it; even then you might bring it down unexpectedly. Much better to have a staging server where you can run load tests before putting changes into production.
One of our clients uses Techout (www.techout.com) and is very pleased with the service.
There is no charge for alerts, no matter what kind or how many, and they offer email, voicemail and SMS alerts -- and if something major happens, a phone call from a live person to help you out.
It's all based on service -- you don't install the software and you have a consultant who works with you to determine the best approach for your business. It's one of the most convenient web application monitoring services because they take care of everything.
I would just add that you can predict error likelihood somewhat based on history of past errors and having fixed them. With smaller scale internal testing if you were to graph the frequency and severity of problems that have been corrected to this point you'll have an overview of predictable new problems. If everything has been running error free for some time now, then the two sources of trouble would be recent changes or scalability issues.
From the above it sounds like scalability is your only worry, but I just mention the past-error frequency test because the teams I've been on invariably think they got the last error fixed and there are no more. Until there is.
Changing the line a little bit, something I really think is useful and changed a lot how I monitor my apps is to log javascript exceptions somewhere. There's a very nice implementation that logs that directly from user browsers to Google Analytics.
This is a must for Javascript centered web applications, and can give you results based directly on users browsers what can lead to very unexpected errors (iE and mobile browser are pain)
Disclaimer: My post bellow
http://www.directperformance.com.br/en/javascript-debug-simples-com-google-analytics
For the internet presence monitoring, I would suggest the service that I am working on: Sucuri NBIM (Network-based integrity monitor).
It does availability and integrity checks, looking for changes on your internet presence (sites, DNS, WHOIS, headers, etc) and loss of connectivity. It is free and you can try it out here.

How can I protect my web-based game against cheaters?

I just wrote one of my first web applications (Linux, Apache, MySQL, Django), and would like to launch it publicly. It's a webform-based task disguised as a game; I intend to eventually put it on Amazon Mechanical Turk and give small bonuses to people who achieve certain scores.
Even though this app does not have a tremendously high security risk, I need to safeguard it against manipulation and reverse engineering. However, I have little formal training in testing/security. Given that there are tangible prizes to be won, I know people will have an incentive to cheat, whether by altering POST data, pressing "back" and re-submitting data until they win, etc. So far, I have been dealing with these issues on an ad-hoc basis by putting in security tests as I think of possible exploits. However, I realize there are probably lots of forms of manipulation that I haven't thought of yet.
Can anybody recommend some reading materials from which I can learn how to protect my website against manipulation and reverse engineering?
A very good place to read up is OWASP; see http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Main_Page. They have extensive documentation regarding website security.
Edit: For a quick overview, check the "Top Ten."
The Google Browser Security Handbook has a lot of information about potential vulnerabilities in the web architecture, in particular the details that are affected by the behavior of web browsers (as opposed to server based vulnerabilities, like SQL injection attacks and the like). It is a good starting point for learning about how browsers work in ways that impact security, like how they handle cookies, cross domain requests, images and MIME types, etc.
SQL Injection
Prevent malicious users from altering SQL queries via URL query strings.
DoS Attacks
Prevent users from the same IP address from accessing your site an excessive number of times in a small space of time.
Password Strength
When allowing users to create their own passwords, show a password strength indicator which encourages users to enter stronger passwords.
Captcha
Stop non-human users from submitting to forms by presenting a captcha image. You may also want to use this if password authentication is failed multiple times, to prevent robots from guessing passwords.
One book I might recommend is "Security Engineering" by Ross Anderson. It's fairly detailed and it gives a good overview of many different topics relating to computer security, although not all of it is relevant for securing a website.