This site is the archived OWASP Foundation Wiki and is no longer accepting Account Requests.
To view the new OWASP Foundation website, please visit https://owasp.org
Difference between revisions of "OWASP Periodic Table of Vulnerabilities - HTTP Request/Response Smuggling"
James Landis (talk | contribs) |
James Landis (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
=== Discussion / Controversy === | === Discussion / Controversy === | ||
| − | Framework-level solutions for enforcing correct CRLF behavior and preventing header manipulation are addressed by [[OWASP Periodic Table of Vulnerabilities - HTTP Response Splitting]]. | + | Framework-level solutions for enforcing correct CRLF behavior and preventing header manipulation are addressed by [[OWASP Periodic Table of Vulnerabilities - HTTP Response Splitting]]. Tangentially described by the [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3724.txt end-to-end principle]. May require solving the multiple parser problem and enforcement of end-to-end principle all the way through frameworks and custom code. |
=== References === | === References === | ||
| + | [ | ||
[http://www.securiteam.com/securityreviews/5GP0220G0U.html HTTP Request Smuggling]<BR> | [http://www.securiteam.com/securityreviews/5GP0220G0U.html HTTP Request Smuggling]<BR> | ||
[http://www.owasp.org/images/1/1a/OWASPAppSecEU2006_HTTPMessageSplittingSmugglingEtc.ppt HTTP Message Splitting, Smuggling and Other Animals (Amit Klein, OWASP)]<BR> | [http://www.owasp.org/images/1/1a/OWASPAppSecEU2006_HTTPMessageSplittingSmugglingEtc.ppt HTTP Message Splitting, Smuggling and Other Animals (Amit Klein, OWASP)]<BR> | ||
[http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2047.txt Message Header Extensions (RFC)]<BR> | [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2047.txt Message Header Extensions (RFC)]<BR> | ||
[http://projects.webappsec.org/w/page/13246930/HTTP%20Response%20Smuggling Response Smuggling (WASC)]<BR> | [http://projects.webappsec.org/w/page/13246930/HTTP%20Response%20Smuggling Response Smuggling (WASC)]<BR> | ||
Revision as of 00:11, 16 November 2013
HTTP Request/Response Smuggling
Root Cause Summary
Malformed HTTP requests and responses are interpreted differently by proxies, web servers, or other systems which process HTTP along the request/response path. This can allow a request or response to bypass proxy filters or rules, poison caches, or cause the response from one request to be incorrectly matched with another.
Browser / Standards Solution
Tighten RFC standards to describe precise behavior for malformed request/response data, including rules for handling duplicate headers.
Perimeter Solution
- Sanitize all HTTP headers, especially duplicates, by enforcing strict adherence to RFC
- Sanitize both HTTP requests and response bodies, ensuring exact correspondence between Content-Length headers and body lengths
- Avoid HTTP connection sharing
- Enforce SSL to prevent proxy tampering
- Provide configuration option to silently sanitize malformed data or return a 5XX error response
Generic Framework Solution
None
Custom Framework Solution
None
Custom Code Solution
None
Discussion / Controversy
Framework-level solutions for enforcing correct CRLF behavior and preventing header manipulation are addressed by OWASP Periodic Table of Vulnerabilities - HTTP Response Splitting. Tangentially described by the end-to-end principle. May require solving the multiple parser problem and enforcement of end-to-end principle all the way through frameworks and custom code.
References
[
HTTP Request Smuggling
HTTP Message Splitting, Smuggling and Other Animals (Amit Klein, OWASP)
Message Header Extensions (RFC)
Response Smuggling (WASC)
