• Hill (unregistered) in reply to P. Dantic
    Anonymous:
    "Ideally, technical debates are _resoled_ when one side..." should be "resolved".


    No, actually, he meant "re-soled", that is, given a new thick layer of that gummy plastic stuff because the shoe leather is still good.

    And while I'm at it, let me say that whoever brought the system down so that I couldn't study it and learn something from it is a collosal porkface.  Now I'll *never* be satisfied.

    Hill
  • Nick (unregistered)
    Anonymous:
    I think the super simple solution to the argument is to simply look at the log files.  I would make a wager with Tom that you can find at least 10 people that figured out the security hole.  If the same client IP address does an HTTP GET of more than 5 pdfs in the same minute (and that IP does not resolve to a proxy server), then it would be pretty hard to discredit the fact that someone not on development team found the hole.


    Careful with that bet.  I mean if the students were that smart, would they be going to WTFU?

  • Yoda (unregistered)

    It would also be interesting to see whether the log files show that the entire web site was indexed by Google...

  • (cs) in reply to Yoda
    Anonymous:
    It would also be interesting to see whether the log files show that the entire web site was indexed by Google...

    As long as there aren't links directly to the pdf files (without needing a login) Google won't index them.  Google spiders a site (as in follows links).  It doesn't attempt to get past logins, and it doesn't throw random URL's at a domain.
  • (cs) in reply to petvirus
    petvirus:
    Here is an even bigger wtf:

    http://www.portabledocuments.co.uk/download.asp?file=C:/webroot/LocalUser/br4589/Website/send.asp

    Please dont drop the table before i can show this to my friend

    <FONT face=Tahoma>Hopefully, you have shown this to your friend already because now it's broken... who ever took it down took the fun we're supposed to have... :(

    On another thought, maybe they brought it down to apply the necessary security patches required...



    </FONT><FONT face="Times New Roman">
    Anonymous:
    Needless to say I left quickly...

    </FONT><FONT face=Tahoma>Am I the only one who thinks staying and trying to improve the existing system is better than running for your life fearing the abomination?

    I know it's a lot of pain to go through, but...

    Guess I really have much to learn about this world... ;)



    </FONT>
  • N/A (unregistered)

    Not wanting to be confrontational, Jim simply replied that he didn't what anyone to think that he may have tampered with his own application, as he was "familiar with the technical details of the system".

    This is absolutely the SMARTEST thing I have read on The Daily WTF (including comments)!

  • Greg (unregistered) in reply to John Kugelman

    I'm sure the person that found it, yelled "WTF!" or something similar, if not less polite.

    But perhaps we should start a www.dailyomg.com, for your daily "Oh My God" experiences, or www.dailyrmye.com for that daily Roll My Eyes feeling...

  • Metaspace (unregistered) in reply to KattMan

    "no one will figure it out"

    Didn't they say that about the DVD encryption? Or DRM? Or.... :-)

  • Metaspace (unregistered) in reply to MVP
    Anonymous:
    Anonymous:

    Here in Norway, the core IT-administration at the universities is usually top-notch. Barring a few bad apples here and there (most usually business-grad types) who make some weird managment decision regarding platforms everything is run by geeks who *know* what they're doing.  The level of competence just seem to be ridicilously high..


    I call bullsh*it... and forgive me for saying, these statements seem a little arrogant.  Maybe this is true at your university, but I bet you a million bucks it is not the norm.

    Well I don't know much about Norway, except is it so rich (among others, because of Northsea oil) that it is paying dividends to its citizens, and that everybody get's to go to university for free, as well as interest-free loans while studying....so the standards are a little better then in some backwaters of the world (say, the US).

    (I had to write this, the US is sometimes so far from knowing what "civilized world" can mean; BTW, the "free university" thing is the norm in Europe)

    CAPTCHA = CAPTCHA :-)

  • (cs)

    There have been stories about banks doing the same error, just changing the accountnumber in the URL and one can see the transactions and everything from other customers of the bank.

    Also a norwegian pizza deliveryfirm had the same problem, where one could get the whole purchase register of other customers (what does your hero like on his/hers pizza?), not that important perhaps, but still a privacy concern...


  • jjim (unregistered)

    Alex Papadimoulis:

    Tom response, "Well, you were only able to access them because you're familiar with the technical details of the system. No one else would ever be able to actually figure that out on their own. But, go ahead and work on those other issues you found."

    I have discovered and repoerted two similar security problems:

    - first one compromised customer privacy and exposed the webshop's customer record to www,

    - the second one made it possible to read companys internal discussion forum (including bug reports and discussions about profitability of certain accounts) from anywhere in the world wide web.

    The first one I reported as a customer, and I never even got an answer. Last time I checked the problem still persisted and I could view other peoples orders in their webshop by changing the URL parameters.

    Second case was reported when I was working for a business partner of this company. Their chief programmer replied with "Thanks, we'll investigate". Six months later the security hole was still there. It might still be unpatched, but I'm afraid to test it anymore because I am not certain if that is legal. 

    In the first case it is possible that some non-technical secretary/customer service rep read my email and tossed it into the waste basket because he didn't understand what it was about. But in the second case the person who acknoledged receiving my message had overall responsibility of the system, but he still chose not to do anything... I even enclosed detailed steps to reproduce (they where not complicated) and couple of screenshots showing sensitive information which they didn't allow even all of their employees to access.  

     

     

  • (cs)
    Anonymous:
    If you feel like doing charity, feed some hungry kids or something.

    <FONT face=Tahoma>I haven't been in a certain situation "bad enough" to make me leave but if I do, I'll keep that in mind... Thanks!



    </FONT>
  • (cs) in reply to John Kugelman
    Anonymous:
    Anonymous:
    Side WTF here...what's with the ubiquitous attitude among posters on this forum that their experience is sooooo encompassing that they can make comments like "most blah blah blah sucks" or "almost all blah blah blah is insecure". What egos!

    Quite a stretch to assume that your vast experience (sounds a lot like Tom, actually) qualifies you to evaluate what is par for web applications in general. I'm quote confident that your exposure to web applications is but a drop in the bucket of all web applications.


    This is how it is. I'm not being arrogant, just honest. I am not saying that I can authoritatively claim that X% of web apps are poorly written, but what I can say is that of the code I am exposed to, very, very little of it is well-written.

    Sites written in PHP tend to be open to all kinds of code injection attacks. SQL injection is common, but even more so are cross-site scripting vulnerabilities--that is, programmers not properly escaping their variables when they output to the page, via htmlentities() or what have you.

    In Java or C# I see a lot of crazy threading problems. Awful session abuse. Statefulness where statelessness would work better. The frameworks in these languages tend to hide the underlying HTML/HTTP layer, and I think "enterprise-level" developers are more prone to not understanding what exactly is getting sent back and forth. They'll have huge problems trying to set cookies or get their damn login info to get in their damn session.

    People copy and paste JavaScript into their applications. It's pretty safe to say that any JavaScript code examples you find via a Google search are going to be horrible. Unless you get lucky and Dean Edwards's site, for example, pops up. Amateur web programmers will confuse server-side and client-side code, and will do things in JavaScript that really need to be done server-side.

    Again, I'm not being arrogant. I think all of this is a consequence of so much web app code being open source or scripted. I think programmers share PHP, Perl, and JavaScript much more readily than, say, C++, simply because it's all very very open and accessible. And it leads to lots of very poor sites showing off insecure code snippets. Plus web programming leads to more of a "hack away until it works" style of development than traditional programming, I suppose because you don't really run the risk of crashing your computer or anything like that.

    So yeah, this is very much par for the course. It takes maybe 3 lines of code to take an uploaded file and save it off in a directory. To secure it would require a lot of authentication code, running hundreds of lines, probably some web server configuration, which is always a nightmare, assuming you are even able to do that, and so on. Yes, today's WTF is a big security hole, but it's not shocking at all. That's all I'm saying.


    While I agree with most of your comments above, I strongly disagree with your assertion that the culprit of the problem is the fact that source code is open, available, and shared.  Source code, and for that matter any type of information, has been shared for thousands of years -- that's how come our civilization has been able to amass such a mind-bogglingly large collection of knowledge throughout its existence.

    The problem is not its availability or the sharing of it, but its authoritativeness, and the low barriers to entry offered by very high-level languages.  There was a time when programming required strenuous academic training, experience, and understanding of the tools in order for it to work.  And not just to work effectively, but to work at all:  if you didn't learn the language, how it worked, and how to use it, chances are you wouldn't get your code to compile.  Nowadays, highly abstracted languages aimed at being fully accessible to the masses, so that anyone can whip up runnable code without much experience or understanding of the frameworks, are allowing just about anyone with a computer to create multi-user, database-driven applications.  This lowers the costs of labor, of course, which is always viewed as a Good Thing (tm) by employers, but culminates in the sort of horrendous buggy and insecure applications we are used to talking about on this forum.

    Any idiot can whip up a script with PHP, VBScript, or the like, and connect to a database.  This is by design.  The problem is that, unfortunately, just about any idiot *does*.  Add to this the efficiencies of mass publication of the WWWeb and you get, well, a very large and ever-growing pool of crap code and bogus instruction.

    But who uses all this crap code? Is it the experienced programmers?  I posit it isn't -- as you have pointed out that most of it is bad, I can't imagine you, for example, using this pool as a resource.  No, it is those same inexperienced "programmers", the ones using the tools without understanding of their workings, who keep going back to it, and copy+pasting snippets from it verbatim into their own code.

    So you see, it is not the sharing of information that is at fault, it is the ease with which bad information is created and masked as authoritative, and a general lack of education, that is the real problem.

        -dZ.
  • (cs)
    I guess it's been ?!d.


    Do you mean it has been Question-Exclamation-ed? WTF is that??

        -dZ.


  • David (unregistered)

    Oh come on, this isn't a security hole, after all, nobody actually reads URLs anyways.

  • (cs) in reply to hyfe
    Anonymous:
    I'm a little surprised that the consensus among you US people seem to be that is not uncommon at all in your universities. Is it really that bad? Why?

    Here in Norway, the core IT-administration at the universities is usually top-notch. Barring a few bad apples here and there (most usually business-grad types) who make some weird managment decision regarding platforms everything is run by geeks who know what they're doing. The level of competence just seem to be ridicilously high.. as it should be, as you have an ample supply of geeks who need part-time jobs, aswell as an ample supply of graduates with girlfriends on campus who really wouldn't mind staying at the university a few more years.



    Really? I want in.

    Even in a top UK university, I could say some of the graduates are less than stellar. Not sure about the postgrads.

  • Dazed (unregistered) in reply to DZ-Jay
    DZ-Jay:
    I guess it's been ?!d.


    Do you mean it has been Question-Exclamation-ed? WTF is that??

    Consult the logo of this site.

  • (cs) in reply to ProfMikey
    ProfMikey:
    I had a similar story while back ago. Thing was that the uni where I study has a big ldap db to store all the students data, passwords, privilegs and who knows whate else. There are some linux labs aswell. Say, fodora standard installation, thing is this starts sendmail during the bootime...its FREAKING anoying, so I went like "hey lemme turn this sh*t off" as it has no real use in there. So I go single user mode, wow no password prompt - smashing. Then but hey...how does it know my password...oh there is pam-ldap thingy wow...oh hey there is plaintext db ldap pass in the config. Simple...I went to speak to somone who I thought WILL understand my concern...he didn't. I was told they dont mind....cuz there are no students who can do this... except me...pretty cool, isnt it? I had to literally FORCE the other guy to take care of this issue.


    Our entire university network is insecure, and everyone knows it's insecure. It gets even worse when you look at individual passwords.

    But I've still seen worse. Unprotected password files are loads of fun.
  • monkey (unregistered)
    Admitting not to know about something will not raise an eyebrow in Europe


    I love people who admit not knowing something.  It means when they say they do know something they actually might do.

    people who always know the answer so often  just guess at one to look smart :)
  • (cs) in reply to Dazed
    Anonymous:
    DZ-Jay:
    I guess it's been ?!d.


    Do you mean it has been Question-Exclamation-ed? WTF is that??

    Consult the logo of this site.



    Then wouldn't it be more appropriate to say   0.o?!
    I still say that's stupid.  WTF'd seems so much more appropriate.

        -dZ.

  • (cs)

    I have a tendency to booby trap my web apps against this sort of "hacking". If there is a field I pass through GET (and POST, to a lesser degree), it either doesn't matter if you change it, or it's there to let me know who's trying to game my system.

    User friendly is a nice dream, but user hostile makes sure your app is still running fine in the morning.

  • RogerC (unregistered)
    Alex Papadimoulis:

    It had recently "gone live" and Tom still had some money left over in the budget to do testing.



    Typical.
  • (cs) in reply to RogerC
    Anonymous:
    Alex Papadimoulis:

    It had recently "gone live" and Tom still had some money left over in the budget to do testing.



    Typical.


    Wow. I'm actually suprised it took anyone this long to notice that particular WTF.
  • Ian (unregistered) in reply to asuffield
    Anonymous:

    Here in the UK, you can sue idiots like this for giving your information away.


    In the US the idoits sue you!
  • Tox (unregistered) in reply to John Kugelman

    Anonymous:
    This is pretty much par for the course for web applications. In my experience insecure, poorly-designed web apps are the rule, not the exception. This doesn't make me scream "WTF!", just roll my eyes.

    The real WTF, allow me to state the obvious, is that people who can't code take on web development. Browsers are tolerant enough to render any scribble as if they're valid HTML. Compounded with WYSIWYG tools and idiot-proof applications like ASP.NET, this army of web coders THINK they can code.

    It's nearly impossible to tell people apart from their CV/Resume qualifications since they all claim the same. Not to mention in a non-real world, namely, the academics, students are never taught how to build a full web application. Well, I'll heavily doubt the quality if they do. That's why when I recruit programmers, I always ask them to show, or at least describe, the project they've previously worked on. "10 years of experience" is as useless as a university degree nowadays.

  • qwer (unregistered) in reply to hyfe
    Anonymous:
    I'm a little surprised that the consensus among you US people seem to be that is not uncommon at all in your universities. Is it really that bad? Why?


    In the USA (and probably everywhere else), universities are run as a business.  To that end, they hire the cheapest people the can, and students who are working for the school in exchange for course credit instead of money are as cheap as they come.

    That means that they haven't completed their degree, and even if they had a degree, they probably aren't familiar with all the ways that a script can be mis-used.  I work for a university and hire students who can't code their way out of a paper bag because they are the only ones who apply for the jobs.  Security work takes experience and/or reading security papers.  They don't have the former and are too lazy to do the latter.  Hence, these problems flourish in academia.
  • Dennis Decker Jensen (unregistered) in reply to hyfe
    Anonymous:
    I'm a little surprised that the consensus among you US people seem to be that is not uncommon at all in your universities. Is it really that bad? Why?

    Here in Norway, the core IT-administration at the universities is usually top-notch. Barring a few bad apples here and there (most usually business-grad types) who make some weird managment decision regarding platforms everything is run by geeks who know what they're doing. The level of competence just seem to be ridicilously high.. as it should be, as you have an ample supply of geeks who need part-time jobs, aswell as an ample supply of graduates with girlfriends on campus who really wouldn't mind staying at the university a few more years.



    I am from Denmark (Aarhus city) and equally surprised that it is
    that bad!  At least at the university where I am a student, the
    administrators are paranoid enough, and no such thing has ever
    happened here as far as I know.

    My guess is, it is the same at the other universities
    here in Denmark since they are legally obligated to protect personal
    data. But that is the case also in US, right? So what could the explanation be
    for such a difference in precautions with regard to security?

    The level of competence here is high enough that people outside the
    university come to learn security, particularly for
    larger networks with a lot of different kinds of users.

    As it should be!

  • Oh My! (unregistered) in reply to Satanicpuppy

    Satanicpuppy:
    I have a tendency to booby trap my web apps against this sort of "hacking". If there is a field I pass through GET (and POST, to a lesser degree), it either doesn't matter if you change it, or it's there to let me know who's trying to game my system.

    User friendly is a nice dream, but user hostile makes sure your app is still running fine in the morning.

    Reality bytes! (niiiiiice)

  • Dazed (unregistered) in reply to Satanicpuppy
    Satanicpuppy:
    I have a tendency to booby trap my web apps against this sort of "hacking". If there is a field I pass through GET (and POST, to a lesser degree), it either doesn't matter if you change it, or it's there to let me know who's trying to game my system.

    Do you also use idiotic markup to make people wonder how idiotic the server side is?

  • Anonymous (unregistered)
    Alex Papadimoulis:

    It turned out that Tom was very skeptical that it could provide the same features that his system did.

    I bet he was. After all, defeats the whole purpose of looking up personal details of people.
  • Hotta (unregistered) in reply to Mike Rod
    Mike Rod:
    A little boring story

    I bet Tom's 10+ years of experience is a bluff to make this story more "wtf-worthy"

    Mike Rod

    Par for the course.

  • Hotta (unregistered) in reply to rocksanddirt
    Anonymous:
    Im no lawyer, but ...

    I doubl anyone here would believe you if you say you are.

  • scc4fun (unregistered) in reply to Hotta
    Anonymous:
    Mike Rod:
    A little boring story

    I bet Tom's 10+ years of experience is a bluff to make this story more "wtf-worthy"

    Mike Rod

    Par for the course.



    The article states in the first paragraph:
    Tom believed that, despite only having a solid year of experience outside of his eighteen years at WTFU, he was The Chosen One, responsible for introducing "his students" into the Real World.

    The "ten years" was a reference to what happens in the real world.

    ~scc4fun


    captha: knowhutimean (do ya?)

  • (cs)

    Anonymous:
    I have seen this type of hole in dozens of places, including my credit union, who hosted scanned check images using the URL http://mycreditunion.com/checkimage.asp?accountnumber=12345&checknumber=1001.

    What's the problem with putting the account number and check number in the URL? You're logged in, you've got a session that's associated with your user ID and account number. If you change those values to try to look at someone else's check, I would bet that all you get is an error message and your account flagged as an attempted cracker.

    The real security problem here is that it's an http URL instead of https. I don't really want my ISP/the NSA/the man-in-the-middle watching my banking activity or viewing my checks.

    I hope they at least use https for login.

  • (cs) in reply to Unklegwar

    Anonymous:
    Side WTF here...what's with the ubiquitous attitude among posters on this forum that their experience is sooooo encompassing that they can make comments like "most blah blah blah sucks" or "almost all blah blah blah is insecure". What egos!

    Trust me, "most blah blah blah sucks" and "almost all blah blah blah is insecure", for any values of blah blah blah you care to name.

    Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is shit.

  • (cs) in reply to Satanicpuppy

    Satanicpuppy:
    I have a tendency to booby trap my web apps against this sort of "hacking". If there is a field I pass through GET (and POST, to a lesser degree), it either doesn't matter if you change it, or it's there to let me know who's trying to game my system.

    So your web apps don't take any real parameters. No data from the client side ever has any real effect on what happens on the server side. In what sense are they web apps? How do they do anything?

  • Dave (unregistered)

    No wonder most don't take college systems serious.

  • Paolo Greco (unregistered) in reply to MVP

    At both universities I had the pleasure to study/work in Italy (www.polimi.it and www.unimib.it), network admins were damn well sure what they were doing. In the latter i was the bofh of a network connected to the university network and I always found them ultra-eager to help as well.

    Except they forced us to use their network equipment. :( captcha: wigwam... WTF? O_o

Leave a comment on “Apply Yourself ... at WTFU”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article