\end{result}
\item
-\pass{}
+\fail{}
Verify that forms containing credentials are not filled in by
the application. Pre-filling by the application implies that
credentials are stored in plaintext or a reversible format,
which is explicitly prohibited.
\begin{result}
-No credentials (that should not be stored in plain text) are ever filled in by
-the application.
+No credentials that come from the database are pre-filled by the application.
+However, in some forms, the application pre-fills password fields from the
+request's POST data. This is not necesarry.\footnote{This issue was actually
+overlooked when auditing manually, and was found when running the Fortify tool.
+In the initial audit, we only ensured that no internal information (from the
+database) was leaked in this way.}
\end{result}
\setcounter{enumi}{3}
\begin{result}
The input to various forms is not sanitized at all. This makes the implementation
- in (not only) \texttt{Users::find} vulnerable to SQL injections. The login form
- is also vulnerable. Any user can execute arbitrary SQL code from the username field.
+ in (not only) \code{Users::find} vulnerable to \SQL{} injections. The login form
+ is also vulnerable. Any user can execute arbitrary \SQL{} code from the username field.
The following example code can submitted as username in the login form, which
- will set the password of the \texttt{admin} user to \texttt{s3cret}:
+ will set the password of the \code{admin} user to \code{s3cret}:
\code{"; UPDATE users SET password='\$1\$OWgsBb90\$Lkko6aZwmp9XOVrFI09Ab0' WHERE \\username='admin' AND 'a' = "a}
\begin{result}
The application allows the user to use any password (except ones that contain
- SQL code).
+ \SQL{} code).
\end{result}
\item
expire, however. It would be even better to require that a token be used
withing a day (or so) after creation.
- The security of the SMTP connection is at the discretion of the web server.
+ The security of the \SMTP{} connection is at the discretion of the web server.
Often these connections are not very secure, but this worry is beyond the
scope of this audit.
\end{result}
force and password hash recovery attacks.
\begin{result}
- Password are stored in database using the PHP function \texttt{crypt}. Internally, this
- function uses salted MD5. This is way easy too reverse with brute-force attacks using dictionary files.
+ Password are stored in database using the \PHP{} function \code{crypt}. Internally, this
+ function uses salted MD5. This is way too reverse with brute-force attacks using dictionary files.
- Instead it would be better to use the \texttt{argon2} password hashing algorithm
- or the PHP \texttt{password\_hash} function (which currently uses BCRYPT).
+ Instead it would be better to use the \code{argon2} password hashing algorithm
+ or the \PHP{} \code{password\_hash} function (which currently uses BCRYPT).
\end{result}
\setcounter{enumi}{15}
link.
\begin{result}
- The app allows admin users to log in over HTTP. This is insecure, as it allows
+ The app allows admin users to log in over \HTTP{}. This is insecure, as it allows
eavesdroppers to intercept password.
- The app should force HTTPS for at least the login form, the \texttt{admin\_controller} and
+ The app should force \HTTPS{} for at least the login form, the \code{admin\_controller} and
for the installation script (because the users posts secrets like the database
password to this page).
\end{result}
login, password reset, or forgot account functionality.
\begin{result}
- All these forms are vulnerable to SQL injection attacks. So any information
+ All these forms are vulnerable to \SQL{} injection attacks. So any information
can leak any information from the database.
\end{result}
\begin{result}
No secrets are initialized by predefined values. The admin user will have
- username \texttt{admin} by default. This is no secret and therefore not
+ username \code{admin} by default. This is no secret and therefore not
considered unsafe.
\end{result}
stored in a protected location.
\begin{result}
- The database credentials are hardcoded in \texttt{config.php}. While it
+ The database credentials are hardcoded in \code{config.php}. While it
would be better to pass secrets as environment variables, this is not
really bad practice.
However, the installation instructions state the following:
\begin{verbatim}
-Change the file permissions to allow all users write access to the folder
-you extracted testcms to.
+Change the file permissions to allow all users write access to the
+folder you extracted testcms to.
\end{verbatim}
This implies making the configuration file readable for all users on the
system. This information should not be accessible for any user other than
- the one running the PHP script.
+ running the \PHP{} script.
\end{result}
\item
\pass{}
Verify that forgotten password and other recovery paths
-use a TOTP or other soft token, mobile push, or other
+use a \TOTP{} or other soft token, mobile push, or other
offline recovery mechanism. Use of a random value in an
e-mail or SMS should be a last resort and is known weak.
e-mail, which is considered weak (but not unsafe).
\end{result}
-\notapplicable{\item
+\item
+\fail{}
Verify that account lockout is divided into soft and hard
lock status, and these are not mutually exclusive. If an
account is temporarily soft locked out due to a brute force
attack, this should not reset the hard lock status.
-% The application has not implemented any lockout mechanisms.
-}
+\begin{result}
+ The application has not implemented any lockout mechanisms.
+\end{result}
-\notapplicable{\item
+\item
+\pass{}
Verify that if shared knowledge based questions (also
-known as "secret questions") are required, the questions
+known as ``secret questions'') are required, the questions
do not violate privacy laws and are sufficiently strong to
-protect accounts from malicious recovery.}
+protect accounts from malicious recovery.
+
+\begin{result}
+ The application uses no shared knowledge based questions, and thus not
+ violate any privacy laws.
+\end{result}
\item
\fail{}
require variation in the use of different passwords.
\end{result}
-\notapplicable{\item
+\item
+\pass{}
Verify that risk based re-authentication, two factor or
-transaction signing is in place for high value transactions.}
+transaction signing is in place for high value transactions.
-% There are no (really) risk based action or which re-authentication would be
-% fit
+\begin{result}
+ There are no (really) risk based action or which re-authentication would be
+ fit.
+\end{result}
\item
\fail{}
use some password strength estimator like \texttt{zxcvbn}\footnote{\url{https://github.com/dropbox/zxcvbn}}.
\end{result}
+\notapplicable{
\item
-\fail{}
+% \fail{}
Verify that all authentication challenges, whether
successful or failed, should respond in the same average
response time.
-\begin{result}
- String comparisation for checking password hases and password reset tokens
- are not in constant time.
-\end{result}
+% \begin{result}
+% String comparisation for checking password hashes and password reset
+% tokens are not in constant time.
+% \end{result}
+}
+\notapplicable{
\item
-\fail{}
-Verify that secrets, API keys, and passwords are not
+% \fail{}
+Verify that secrets, \API{} keys, and passwords are not
included in the source code, or online source code
repositories.
-\begin{result}
- The database credentials are hard coded in \texttt{config.php}. These
- credentials should ideally be passed using environment variables.
-\end{result}
+% \begin{result}
+% The database credentials are hard coded in \code{config.php}. These
+% credentials should ideally be passed using environment variables.
+% \end{result}
+}
\setcounter{enumi}{30}
-\notapplicable{\item
+\item
+\fail{}
Verify that if an application allows users to authenticate,
they can authenticate using two-factor authentication or
other strong authentication, or any similar scheme that
provides protection against username + password
-disclosure.}
+disclosure.
+
+\begin{result}
+ No surch features are implemented.
+\end{result}
\item
\fail{}
repositories / ssproject1617.git / blobdiff