As with all thing's you can make them more or less secure. As stated
before, depending on a level of paranoia nothing are secure!
Mounting a page and making it stateless, and further more making it take
parameters is one of less safer ones.
If the application is a web one, well use CSRF attacks, use random
attacks, Bruteforce the site, go to their operator and get inside the
database. Eventually you will get in, if you cover your tracks.
If the application is a desktop version, deploy a keylogger and a mouse
recorder, grab their password file. If they cycle passwords, bruteforce
that too. Might not work with the first 100 users, but in time and
theory you will get in.
Nothing is secure.
Having an quickstart as a usecase could help developers decide if its
worth the effort. Whats a reasonable level for security... I guess the
best one is telling the users to use the browser exclusivly for the bank
site and be sure to logout before leaving it.
-Nino
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Wicket does nothing to protect from CSRF attacks, and it is trivially
vulnerable. Sure it's a lot more difficult with the standard
?wicket:interface type URLs than it would be with more predictable
URLs, but you can still quite easily guess the URLs, and futhermore,
to improve your chances of success you can simply include many images
in the attacking page with different values for the URLs, i.e.,
img
src="http://thesiteiwannahack.com/?wicket:interface=:11:formToHack::IFormSubmitListener::&myparam1=val1";
and then for page id 11, 12, 13, 14, for 1 to 100 for all I care, all
in one page.
This is not new, it's been discussed a few messages ago... You still
need to hijack the users session.
Furthermore, most people actually LIKE predictable urls and go to
great length to mount pages and make them bookmarkable. There's even a
StatelessForm component, which is entirely vulnerable to CSRF.
Thus, I'd say that even without a quickstart, it's obvious that Wicket
does not offer any CSRF protection out of the box, and that if you
want this kind of protection, you will have to do it yourself (which
is probably not really difficult; though I think many people are not
aware of these kind of attack vectors and don't even think about it,
which is why it would be nice if Wicket *could* do it out of the box).
I believe that answers the original question, that CSRF protection is
*NOT* a security feature offered by Wicket.
I believe that true in the sense that you can always make your pages
vulnerable if you want to (also if its unknowingly).
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:
While that is true.. It's also true that wicket devs favor stuff
proven with a quickstart, because it becomes easier to make a fix for
something you can see in code..
So as I've written once before a quickstart should be the way to go
or just use one of the existing applications, phone book or blog
tutorial etc. And make a hack at that...
regards Nino
Ned Collyer wrote:
Nick, I think you would be quite surprised at the level of auditing
something
has to pass to be used in a financial system, especially a bank.
(unless u
have some dodgy bank)
If something is theoretically possible, then thats as good as "proven".
Gotta remember that hackers are a lot smarter in many instances than
the
people who wrote the software to keep them out.
Nick Heudecker wrote:
Arthur,
Only what you can *prove* matters, not what you think. Have you
created
an
example application with a CSRF attack?
--
-Wicket for love
-Jme for fun
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
