this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
390 points (98.5% liked)

Cybersecurity - Memes

2132 readers
1 users here now

Only the hottest memes in Cybersecurity

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 179 points 1 year ago (3 children)

How to say you're vulnerable to code injection without saying you're vulnerable to code injection.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

Are they vulnerable though, if they already exclude it at the user input?

I yet have to learn SQL and is there a way to allow passwords with '); DROP TABLE... without being vulnerable to an injection?

nevermind i googled it, and there various ways to do so

[–] herrvogel 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This still smells though. Why is the raw, plain text password string getting anywhere near database queries in the first place?

[–] cactusupyourbutt 19 points 1 year ago

I doubt it is. they probably have a WAF that blocks these strings though and didnt want to bother reconfiguring it

[–] rtxn 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Prepared statements, mostly. You define the query using variables, turn that query into a language-dependent object, assign values to those variables, then execute the statement. The values will be passed verbatim, without any parsing.

Or, since we're talking about a password, you could encode or encrypt it before inserting it into the query string. The fact that the website could be negatively affected by phrases in the cleartext password is very concerning.

[–] surewhynotlem 8 points 1 year ago

At best, it means they're storing your password instead of just a salted hash. And that's horrible.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago

I noticed that upper case select, drop etc are not prohibited.

Poorly implemented user input filters are not a valid solution to being vulnerable to injection.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Good old Bobby Tables

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No one in their right mind is storing plain text passwords, or letting them anywhere near the database.

You convert the password to a hash, and store that. And the hash will look nothing like the password the user typed.

[–] acetanilide 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're right. No one in their right mind would do that.

On the other hand, people not in their right mind often run things. Such as my old professional liability insurance. Which wrote the username and password in the yearly statements...

And also sent you the password through email if you forgot it...

Also you couldn't change it...

[–] BURN 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There was a popular companion app to a game I play that’s stored passwords as MD5 hashes for years and when they got hacked they were able to decrypt everything.

Bonus point, the app was released multiple years after md5 was cracked.

Developers (including myself) cannot be trusted to implement the correct process 100% of the time. It’s happened too many times for it to be a single person issue and has transcended into a problem with software engineers

[–] acetanilide 2 points 1 year ago

😬😬 that's crazy but good to know

[–] usefulthings 3 points 1 year ago

Lol. Yes, people do still build systems and store plain text passwords. I regularly get scammers sending me my throwaway passwords from crappy sites. Good thing I never reuse passwords, or email addresses.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they filtered those strings to be safe, and put the notice there to answer the invertible "why won't it accept my password" queries.

It's a shitty password engine. But not necessarily uncleansed

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If they're trying to protect themselves from code injection by rejecting certain user input like that, then they don't actually know how to protect themselves from code injection correctly and there may be serious vulnerabilities that they've missed.

(I think it's likely that, as others have said, they're using off-the-shelf software that does properly sanitize user input, and that this is just the unnecessary result of management making ridiculous demands. Even then, it's evidence of an organization that doesn't have the right approach to security.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thenextguy 5 points 1 year ago

This is the result of some doc writer or middle manager not fully understanding what they've been told.

[–] RizzRustbolt 58 points 1 year ago

Oh BobbyTables, you little rapscallion...

[–] bitwaba 56 points 1 year ago

Little Bobby drop tables

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So they’re not hashing or salting the passwords too. Cool…

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They might be doing it in the DB query, but they’re definitely not sanitized beforehand.

[–] CrayonRosary 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sanitization has nothing to do with salting and hashing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

If you do the salting and hashing in a database query you need to sanitize the input before you use it or you open yourself to SQL injection.

Databases have salting and hashing functions, after all

[–] Rednax 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which makes me want to try and insert a password of a few megabytes worth of text. Should be fine, since there is no max lenght defined, right?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

If there is no overwrought prohibition of something I know that at least in America that means it’s

  1. Affirmatively legal and
  2. Legislatively encouraged by the FREEE Act

So give ’em hell!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago

Obligatory Little Bobby Tables: https://xkcd.com/327/

And for those who feel like saying they've already seen it: https://xkcd.com/1053/

[–] Matriks404 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't believe this is real. This isn't real, right?

[–] ABasilPlant 24 points 1 year ago

This is real - I took the screenshot myself.

[–] dylanTheDeveloper 20 points 1 year ago

What zero string sanitation does to a mfr

[–] EfreetSK 19 points 1 year ago

We could still have some fun with ALTER TABLE

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Some of the strongest and easy to remember passwords are just a few words strung together with a few numbers.

For example: Simpsons7-Purple4-Monkey1-Dishwasher8

Just remember "Simpsons Purple Monkey Dishwasher" and "7418". You're probably never going to forget that and I just tossed it into a password strength tester and it said it would take about 46 billion years to randomly guess it.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago

It would take me about 5 seconds because you just told me what it is genius

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now remember these types of passwords, all different for different services. It's not a realistic expectation. Password managers are a must nowadays if you want to protect your accounts. But these types of passwords are also easier to type out.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

My tactic is use a memorizeable passphrase as the unlock for the vault and assorted gibberish for anything in the vault

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Correct horse battery staple

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Klear 13 points 1 year ago

Yeah, a bunch of asterisks works too.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Password strength checkers are taking an approach that's naive for this case. The actual strength depends on the size of the dictionary and the number of words you randomly choose out of it.

Bcrypt has a length limit of 72 characters, so very long passwords generated this way can be silently truncated. Developers can avoid this problem by running sha256 on the input before giving it to bcrypt, but that isn't common.

[–] thenextguy 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll never understand why spaces are commonly not allowed in passwords.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or you could just use a password manager

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

For maximum security your password manager should have a password and you have no choice but to remember that password.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Memorising 1 password like that sure, but according to bitwarden I have 209 passwords, no way I can ever remember them all

[–] LwL 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If the structure of it is known it becomes much faster. Word+single digit^4 isn't all that hard.

For the vast majority of purposes, it'll be fine. And certainly as long as that particular structure isn't commonplace, it won't be easy to guess anyway. But password strength testers don't consider that - guessing "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" randomly also takes billions of years, so they can give a bit of a sense of false security.

[–] Kramt 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Eh it's still pretty hard.

If we check the numbers of English words from https://www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq-how-many-english-words and take a conservative estimate of 400 000 at the bottom of the page.

That means with the exact format of (word)(number)- 4 times has (without repeating words) 400000*9*399999*9*399998*9*399997*9 = 167957820891293697014400000 combinations. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=400000939999893999979399996*9

The fastest super computer at the moment apparently sits at 1.1 quintillion Hz. Or 1.1 billion billion.

If that computer could make 1 guess every clock cycle it would still take it over 4 years (167957820891293697014400000 / 1.1quintillion = ~52 months ) to run through all possibilities.

Now that is a very fast computer, and we haven't included the possibility of various numbers of words, different delimiter, or where and how often numbers appear. So unless you've really pissed off the US gov I don't think you have to worry about it.

There's a reason passphrases are the currently recommended way to generate secure passwords that are hard to guess but easy to memorize/type in.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Treczoks 14 points 1 year ago

I consider this an invitation.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Looking at that I wouldn't be surprised if those rules are just client-side validation.

[–] perviouslyiner 12 points 1 year ago
[–] Thcdenton 10 points 1 year ago

Ima just use my butthole with a biometric scanner.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

submits Drop Table as passphrase

Grabs popcorn

[–] Kyrgizion 6 points 1 year ago

Didn't say anything about truncate!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Anyone taking bets on them sanitising user passwords?

load more comments
view more: next ›