I discovered something similar recently, though, where a *valid* jpg
containing an XML header was issued to IE (via a direct link to the
image) with a content-type of application/octet-stream and IE attempted
to render the XML rather than rendering the image (or prompting for an
action by the user, which is what I was going for). IE subsequently
issued an error indicating that it was unable to render the XML page
(although it was a jpeg image with a .jpg extension).
While this may not be a direct threat if the server is sending the
correct content-type, it could be a threat otherwise. This, being
untested speculation, would require testing to see exactly what you can
get IE to do with embedded code.
Regards,
Tim Tompkins
Brion Vibber wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Marc Ruef wrote:
> | III. EXPLOITATION
> |
> | The following proof-of-concept has been published in the articles "Wie
> | mit GIF-Bildern Cross Site Scripting-Angriffe im Internet Explorer
> | umgesetzt werden können" in scip monthly Security Summary Issue 19.
> | September 2005 (pp. 12-14)[1] and "GIF-Bug im Internet Explorer 6 -
> | Proof of Concept" at computec.ch[2]:
> |
> | 01 <GIF89aź 8 ÷™f˙™™>
>
> The reason that this works in this case is that this is *not* a GIF
> header; GIF headers do not begin with "<". It is well known that IE will
> interpret files as HTML that contain certain HTML tags if a another type
> detection doesn't override it.
>
> For Microsoft's vague documentation on this process, see:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/networking/moniker/overview/appendix_a.asp
>
>
> If you remove the "<" at the beginning, then IE will detect the GIF
> signature, overriding its HTML detection, and show a 'broken image' icon
> with no interpretation of JavaScript.
>
> (Tested MSIE 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2)
>
> However the advice is good; as a general rule sites accepting uploads
> should validate them as carefully as possible, as IE may not recognize
> all file types properly. Invalid image file headers and HTML-like tags
> near the start of a file should be considered suspicious.
>
> - -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFDMyh1wRnhpk1wk44RAtoDAJ9QIJbNMXro7z3pFCzXuOy1Oz10gACfZxTd
> OSITbHzoYn+T8Ozq0d6ZfQ4=
> =Gm+c
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Received on Sep 23 2005
Intro
