What!?!?!?

I sure hope the application security would say "hey, you don't have
permission to look at that userID's info, so here's a nice fat error
message", long before it every got to querying the database.

That's the whole point of a security system: to control access to resources.
If you merely make it hard to request the resource, but don't actually
control access, you don't have a security system, you've just got a mess.

Cheers,
barneyb

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:54 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Securing CF Apps.
>
> and it's not that little....take this example
>
> a page displays user specific medical record data and take
> URL param containing user_ID
>
> don't encrypt user_ID in URL
>   -any shmuck can alter the value of user_ID to see anyone's data
>
> do encrypt user_ID in URL
>   -same shmuck would not be able to make such a chnage as the
> user_ID would not decrypt properly and the query would fail
>
> I'd say encrypting vars in the URL is pretty dang important ;-)
>
> That said it's also a good idea to make sure the record being
> displayed belongs to the logged in user ;-)
>
> Cheers
>
> Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
> VP & Director of E-Commerce Development
> Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
> t. 250.920.8830
> e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Macromedia Associate Partner
> www.macromedia.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group
> Founder & Director
> www.cfug-vancouverisland.com
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Adrocknaphobia
>   To: CF-Talk
>   Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:47 PM
>   Subject: Re: Securing CF Apps.
>
>
>   Little is better than none.
>
>   -adam
>
>   > -----Original Message-----
>   > From: Kwang Suh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 08:42 PM
>   > To: 'CF-Talk'
>   > Subject: RE: Securing CF Apps.
>   >
>   > Munging URLs provides a little, if any, benefit for web apps.
>   >
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: "Heald, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   > Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:34 pm
>   > Subject: RE: Securing CF Apps.
>   >
>   > > Good post man, and your right, for the most part the
> applications
>   > > I am
>   > > talking about are not available over the internet, or
> only through
>   > > VPN or
>   > > other methods.
>   > >
>   > > Like I said earlier, for public sites you are going to use very
>   > > differentresources than you will use on a closed/classified
>   > > application.
>   > > However the topic was securing CF apps.  Not sites :)  
> it can be
>   > > difficultfor some to differentiate between an
> application and a site.
>   > >
>   > > --
>   > > Timothy Heald
>   > > Web Portfolio Manager
>   > > Overseas Security Advisory Council
>   > > U.S. Department of State
>   > > 571.345.2319
>   > >
>   > > The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of
>   > > the U.S.
>   > > Department of State or any affiliated organization(s).  
> Nor have these
>   > > opinions been approved or sanctioned by these
> organizations. This
>   > > e-mail is
>   > > unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
>   > >
>   > > -----Original Message-----
>   > > From: Ian Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   > > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:19 PM
>   > > To: CF-Talk
>   > > Subject: RE: Securing CF Apps.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > I see this as a sliding scale, security vs user experience.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > There's the general public website where the the owners
> want as much
>   > > exposure as possible.  For this type of application you
> may not want
>   > > security to the nth degree.  As was just posted,
> allowing the user to
>   > > bookmark pages and/or directly type url's is desirable for the
>   > > purpose of
>   > > that application.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > On the other hand, there are applications where this is
>   > > undesirable.  I
>   > > suspect that applications Tim is writing are even
> available to the
>   > > generalpublic at all, and if you are even seeing the page in a
>   > > browser if you are
>   > > not supposed to be, you have hacked through several
> layers of security
>   > > already.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > We write applications somewhat in the middle.  There
> are parts of
>   > > our data
>   > > that we DO NOT WANT to exposed to any more risk then we
> can, very
>   > > sensitiveHIPPA data.  We are taking at least a year to
> thoroughly
>   > > test our first
>   > > application that will allow a very limited access to users to
>   > > their personal
>   > > data directly through the internet.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > So it all comes down to the analysis that has been
> mentioned.  You
>   > > need to
>   > > decided on the purpose of the application, what are
> it's security
>   > > needs and
>   > > build to that level.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > My .02, keep the change.
>   > > --------------
>   > > Ian Skinner
>   > > Web Programmer
>   > > BloodSource
>   > > www.BloodSource.org
>   > > Sacramento, CA
>   > >
>   > > "C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
>   > >     - Cynthia Dunning
>   > >  _____  
>   > >
>   > >
>   > >
>   > >
>   >
>   >
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to