Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Possibly a stupid question RPC over HTTP
From: ASB <abaker () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:44:42 -0400

You need protocol level inspection (i.e. beyond SPI) if you're going
to monitor that kind of traffic.

Also, the support for RPC over HTTP (should really be HTTPS) is not as
open ended as you might fear.

Look at the following: 
http://www.google.com/search?q=RPC%20over%20HTTPS%20implement


- ASB
  Cheap, Fast, Secure -- Pick Any TWO.
  http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/




On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:41:56 -0700, Daniel Sichel
<daniels () ponderosatel com> wrote:
This may just reflect my ignorance, but I read (and found hard to
believe) that Microsoft has implemented RPC over HTTP. Is this not a
HUGE security hole? If I understand it correctly it means that good old
HTML or XML can invoke a process using standard web traffic (port 80)?
Is there any permission checking done? what things can be invoked by RPC
over HTTP? Jeeze, to me it looks like the barn door is now wide open. Am
I right, and if so, how can I detect RPCs in web traffic to block this
junk? Can ANY stateful packet filter see this stuff or is the pattern
too broad in allowed RPCs?

Again, I hope this is not a stupid question or inappropriate format for
this, as somebody else recently said, there is already enough noise on
this list. I would hate to see this list degenerate, it has been REALLY
valuable to me as a network engineer on occaison.

Thanks all,
Dan Sichel
Ponderosa telephone
daniels () ponderosatel com

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]