I can't comment on the security aspect, but at the very least there's a bug in the WMS compliance. For the GetCapabilities URL it should be returning an XML Service Exception (because it has an invalid SERVICE value), not a HTTP 500.

I.e., the same request to a (random) GeoServer box shows the sort of thing that should be coming back:

http://si.icnf.pt/geoserver/POEM/ows?REQUEST=GetCapabilities&SERVICE=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&VERSION=1.3.0


On 2020-02-01 18:33, nadiaspit wrote:
Hi,
I am a student of Cybersecurity Master at University of Pisa. My final
project work is about a Security Test of an installation of qgis server +
lizmap web client.
At a first analysis, I found out that lizmap web client is vulnerable to
"Buffer overflow attack"
https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Buffer_overflow_attack

The problem:
"Potential Buffer Overflow. The script closed the connection and threw a 500
Internal Server Error"
The solution:
"Rewrite the background program using proper return length checking. This
will require a recompile of the background executable."

Here you can view the  report
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/12s-akDIr9s127kw6MSYKRp1ph29gY_u3/view?usp=sharing>
:

I also posted this question to Lizmap web client Github: Is Buffer Overflow
vulnerability a false positive for Lizmap web client?

They suggested to ask to this group.
Any help would be very appreciated.

Kind Regards,
Nadia Spitilli



--
Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QGIS-Developer-f4099106.html
_______________________________________________
QGIS-Developer mailing list
[email protected]
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

_______________________________________________
QGIS-Developer mailing list
[email protected]
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Reply via email to