Re: squirrelmail CSRF vulnerability
On Sat, 12 May 2007, Josh Zlatin-Amishav wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007, Tim Newsham wrote:
>
> > This might just be semantics: I wouldn't consider the XSS attack to be a
> > CSRF attack.
>
> The point is, if the application is vulnerable to an XSS vulnerability
> then having a CSRF token wont protect you from a CSRF attack. The
> attacker could use the XSS vector to steal the CSRF token, much like the
> Samy worm worked.
Let's have an HTTP server with a buffer overflow vulnerability making it
possible to run arbitrary code. We can use the vulnerability to read
files outside the document root (perhaps using relative pathnames like
"../../../file") but I don't think this means we should call such an
attack "a path traversal".
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."