Re: Using of the sites for attacks on other sites

[Benji <me () b3nji com>]

One say, I hope I can troll FD as well as you do.

Sent from my iPhone

On 11 Jul 2010, at 21:53, "MustLive" <mustlive () websecurity com ua> wrote:

> Hello Chris and Sebastien!
>
> > I do not see your name anywhere in the top ten?
>
> Chris, I'll answer at your question, even Sebastien already have answered at
> it in the list. I see two senses in your question (one direct and one
> hidden) and will answer on both of them.
>
> Note, that your question is out of topic of my letter, but the topic with
> TOP 10 is also interesting, so I'll answered on it briefly. And then I'll
> direct the discussion to the original topic which I started in my first
> letter (about my article).
>
> About direct sense of your question. My articles are mentioned in the total
> list of hacks (as I said in my first letter). And, as you understand, my
> name is not mentioned in top ten because judges selected other articles for
> the TOP 10.
>
> Do I agree with order in the TOP 10 - no I don't, but it's judges decision.
> And anyway all researches in the total list are interesting. Do I agree that
> Jeremiah not put all my submissions to the prior (and then to the total)
> list of hacks (he selected only part of them) - no I don't, but it's his
> decision. I'm not worry about this - because I'm writing articles for
> people, not for some places in tops and not for some prizes.
>
> About hidden sense of your question. It looks like you are bragging about
> the fact that you are in the top ten, and I'm not. This bragging will not
> touch me, so no need to try ;-). I stated my position above concerning my
> articles and the resulting TOP 10.
>
> The brag it's not serious. And you must take into account, that such
> bragging about the fact that you get to the top ten is directed not only
> against me, but also against all other security researches who participated
> last year, but not get to the top ten. So think about it.
>
> > Actually some of his articles were listed (76 to 80) and he said it was
> > mentioned in the post, not the top 10.
>
> Sebastien, yes, my articles, which were selected by Jeremiah, were published
> (in order of placing into the list) at page with prior list of hacks (from
> which TOP 10 was selected) and at page with TOP 10 and the total list of
> hacks. But as I said before, Chris had put other sense in his question.
>
> Off topic is not good, but bragging (which he demonstrated) is not serious.
> And taking into account that in my article I mentioned that there are such
> vulnerabilities at Googles' sites which allow to attack other sites via
> Google's servers (and Chris is an employee of this company), so it's twice
> not serious from his side.
>
> Let's back to original topic of my original letter. Where I talked about my
> article Using of the sites for attacks on other sites.
>
> I'm finding such Abuse of Functionality vulnerabilities already from 2007
> and informing admins of vulnerable sites about them. But mostly all admins
> are ignoring this type of holes (like many other holes), because they don't
> care about security or because they don't see big deal in that their sites
> connecting to arbitrary sites. But there are admins of web sites which
> attend to such vulnerabilities - for example, last month guys from W3C
> agreed with my warning and promised to fix these holes
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2010Jun/0032.html). And I
> also informed Google about such issues at their sites (we'd see how they
> fix them).
>
> Soon I'll write about my new researches on this topic which I made recently.
> And for these researches I created a tool for conducting of DDoS attacks on
> the sites via other sites, which I'd write about in the next letter.
>
> Best wishes & regards,
> MustLive
> Administrator of Websecurity web site
> http://websecurity.com.ua
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Chris Evans" <scarybeasts () gmail com>
> To: "MustLive" <mustlive () websecurity com ua>
> Cc: <full-disclosure () lists grok org uk>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 11:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Using of the sites for attacks on other sites
>
>
> 2010/6/28 MustLive <mustlive () websecurity com ua>:
> > Hello participants of Full-Disclosure!
> >
> > For last two months I didn't post my articles to this list due to some not
> > serious moaning in April on some of my articles (you always can find my
> > articles at my site and in WASC Mailing List). But at the end of June I
> > decided to remind you about my last articles.
> >
> > Recently I wrote new article Using of the sites for attacks on other sites
> > (http://websecurity.com.ua/4322/). This is brief English version of it.
> >
> > Last year in article DoS attacks via Abuse of Functionality
> > vulnerabilities
> > (it was mentioned at
> > http://jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2010/01/top-ten-web-hacking-techniques-of-2009.html)
>
> I do not see your name anywhere in the top ten?
>
> Cheers
> Chris
>
> > I told about possibility of conducting of DoS attacks via Abuse of
> > Functionality vulnerabilities at other sites. Particularly I showed
> > examples
> > of such vulnerabilities at web sites regex.info and www.slideshare.net.
> > These attacks can be as unidirectional DoS, as bidirectional DoS,
> > depending
> > on capacities of both servers.
> >
> > And now I'll tell you about possibility of conducting of CSRF attacks on
> > other sites via Abuse of Functionality vulnerabilities. Researching of
> > such
> > attacks I begun already at 2007 when found such vulnerability at
> > regex.info.
> >
> > Using of Abuse of Functionality for attacks on other sites.
> >
> > Sites, which allow to make requests to other web sites (to arbitrary web
> > pages), have Abuse of Functionality vulnerability and can be used for
> > conducting of CSRF attacks on other sites. Including DoS attacks via Abuse
> > of Functionality, as it was mentioned above. CSRF attacks can be made only
> > to those pages, which don't require authorization.
> >
> > For these attacks it's possible to use as Abuse of Functionality
> > vulnerabilities (similar to mentioned in this article), as Remote File
> > Include vulnerabilities (like in PHP applications) - it's Abuse of
> > Functionality via RFI.
> >
> > This attack method can be of use when it's needed to conduct invisible
> > CSRF
> > attack on other site (to not show yourself), for conducting of DoS and
> > DDoS
> > attacks and for conducting of other attacks, particularly for making
> > different actions which need to be made from different IP. For example, at
> > online voting, for turning of hits of counters and hits of advertising at
> > the site, and also for turning of clicks (click fraud).
> >
> > Abuse of Functionality:
> >
> > Attack is going at request of one site (http://site) to another
> > (http://another_site) at using of appropriate function of the site
> > (http://site/script).
> >
> > http://site/script?url=http://another_site
> >
> > Advantages of this attack method.
> >
> > In this part of the article I wrote a list of advantages of this attack
> > method. And I mentioned another two important paragraphs:
> >
> > Note, that this DoS attack is possible to use for attacks on redirectors,
> > which I wrote about in my articles Redirector’s hell and Hellfire for
> > redirectors.
> >
> > Also at conducting of DoS attacks it's possible to use several such
> > servers
> > at once and so to conduct DDoS attack. In such case these servers will be
> > appearing as zombie-computers. I.e. botnet will be made from not home
> > computers, but from web servers (which can have larger capacities and
> > faster
> > connections). So these vulnerabilities can lead to appearing of new class
> > of
> > botnets (with zombie-servers).
> >
> > Examples of vulnerable web sites and web services.
> >
> > In this part of the article I showed examples of different web sites and
> > web
> > services which could be used for conducting of attacks on other sites.
> > Including regex.info, www.slideshare.net, anonymouse.org, www.google.com,
> > translate.google.com, babelfish.altavista.com, babelfish.yahoo.com,
> > keepvid.com, web application Firebook, W3C validators and iGoogle.
> >
> > Best wishes & regards,
> > MustLive
> > Administrator of Websecurity web site
> > http://websecurity.com.ua
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

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