Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Generic Attack Detection - ph-Neutral 0x7d8

2.838 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Publicado en: Empresariales, Tecnología
  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

Generic Attack Detection - ph-Neutral 0x7d8

  1. 1. Generic Attack Detection Avoiding blacklisting traps with the PHPIDS A presentation by Mario Heiderich For ph-neutral 0x7d8
  2. 2. Who? Mario Heiderich  CSO for in Cologne, Germany  Lead developer / co-founder PHPIDS  Has browsed a lot of sites
  3. 3. What?  Attack detection for webapps  Type and weight analysis  The PHPIDS and some of its whereabouts  Generic attack detection vs. plain blacklisting
  4. 4. Current Situation  Webapps grow in numbers and complexity  User generated input of all possible kinds  Securing new apps is hard  Securing existing apps is even harder  Difficult to manage the split between usability and security
  5. 5. Approaches to deal with Webappsec  Total ignorance (yep – that sumtimes happens...)  Drastic filtering, escaping or senseless validation, right Mr. O'Malley?  Backup & Restore (for real!!1)  WAFs and IDSses  Training and Consulting  Spending a lot of money for useless stuff
  6. 6. The open source „market“  mod_security, JWall, HTMLPurifier, Anti-Samy and others  Either very specialized...  ...or entirely based on blacklisting  Sometimes generating vulnerabilities themselves  And sometimes crippling user's input
  7. 7. Our approach  Say yes to blacklisting!  Use it to detect, categorize and weight  User input won't be touched  Total freedom of choice for the developer  and... generic attack detection
  8. 8. Let's have a look One of the 70 regex rules to detect XSS, SQLi, RCE and many other attack patterns <filter> <rule><![CDATA[(?:^>[ws]*</?w{2,}>)]]></rule> <description>finds unquoted attribute breaking in...</description> <tags> <tag>xss</tag> <tag>csrf</tag> </tags> <impact>2</impact> </filter>
  9. 9. Step by step  User generated input coming in  First test to check if the whole detection process is necessary  Conversion process  Detection process  Reporting and optional logging
  10. 10. Btw converting...  The converter is capable of normalizing the user's input from several formats  JS Oct, Hex, Unicode and Charcode  UTF7-Shmootf7 (no idea why this still is an issue)  Loads of entities - be they hex, dec, named or others  SQL-, obfuscation- and concatenation patterns...  Evil chars, nullbytes, RTL/LTR chars  Comments, special numeric formats etc. etc. ...
  11. 11. Easy implementation Not so hard isn't it? The „doing something smart“-part might be though... and no – replacing the comment by echo $result; or a redirect is not the cleverest way...
  12. 12. But there were problems  Exotic vectors omfg noez!!  Superdynamic languages as basis for attack vectors  Ternary obfuscation on acid  Rules getting bloaty by the time  More false alerts then necessary  Performance going down
  13. 13. Some friends...  quot;; define ( _a, quot;0008avwga000934mm40re8n5n3aahgqvaga0a303quot;) ; if ( !0) $c = USXWATKXACICMVYEIkw71cLTLnHZHXOTAYADOCXC ^ _a; if ( !0) system($c) ;//  aa'<3+1 or+1=+'1--SQLi luvz ya!  a//a'u000aeval(name)  y=<a>eval</a>;content[y](location.hash)
  14. 14. Let's go generic!  Plain blacklisting based detection must be extended  Currently exist two plain (some may call 'em weird) but powerful methods  The ratio calculation with a prepended normalization  The centrifuge – normalizing and weighting standard programming language elements
  15. 15. Let's see..
  16. 16. There's more...
  17. 17. ... and the rest
  18. 18. Conclusions  Code and thresholds are result of intense testing  Tests are based on about 500 vectors plus several random regular texts to avoid false alerts  Since programming languages have similiarities the centrifuge results do either  Still space left for optimization
  19. 19. The future...  Optimization of the existing code  More detection routines  More granular and statistic based weighting and string analysis  Cooperation with several universities and other projects  More verbose demo and result object
  20. 20. So...  Suggestions and other input are always welcome  Contact us at any time via our Google Group or forum or via Email or IM or whatever way you feel like 
  21. 21. Thanks a lot for listening!