Andres, If you don't mind I begin to develop "rewritten URLs" [0] support with fuzzURLParts and urlRules options inside http-settings. I've made a branch for it [0].
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewrite_engine [1] https://w3af.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/w3af/branches/rewritten-urls/ 16.11.2011 19:33, Taras пишет: > Andres, > >>> Andres, when I have suggested this feature in w3af I didn't mean >>> *full* REST >>> specification support. >>> >>> Today a lot of web applications (especially based on frameworks like >>> Django >>> or in the old way by Apache mod_rewrite module) uses REST-like URLs >>> e.g.: >>> >>> http://example.com/foo/bar/123 >>> >>> In this URL we (not scanner) can see such parts as: >>> >>> * foo - controller name >>> * bar - action name >>> * 123 - parameter value >>> >>> From classic web spider point of view it looks like directory >>> hierarchy - it >>> is incorrect behavior! All these parts we need to fuzz! >> >> Agreed, so we don't want to support REST, we want to support >> mod_rewrite. Would that appreciation be correct? > I wouldn't use term mod_rewrite as the name of the whole feature because > mod_rewrite is simply one of REST URLs cases. In modern web applications > which are based on frameworks like Django *internal URL processing* > becomes more and more popular. mod_rewrite is web server based URL > processing. > >>> What I suggest to implement is rules for such URLs. It can be done as >>> http-settings >>> file option called "url-rules" (name is not important): >>> >>> /top/users/%s/view/%d/ >>> /controller/action/%d/ >>> ... >>> >>> %s and %d are special tokens which can be used by w3af to determine fuzz >>> points. >> >> I like the idea, but I would do it in a more configurable way. >> Right now we have the "fuzzFileName" setting in w3af, which >> enabled/disables what I explained in the initial email. In the future >> I would like to see the following options: >> >> * fuzzFileName (default: False) >> * fuzzDirectories (default: False) >> * url-rules (default: no filename with rules) >> >> With this, when a user wants to fuzz all the "directories" in all >> URLs he just enables "fuzzDirectories" and "fuzzFileName". If he wants >> to have more control over which parts of the URL are actually fuzzed, >> he can disable the previous ones and set the url-rules himself. > Hmmm, interesting idea. But let's call this option something like > fuzzURLParts. fuzzDirectories can be misunderstood by user. > >> For the rules file, what I recommend is that we support parsing of >> mod_rewrite and django rules (if possible) so that a developer can >> simply copy/paste those rules into a file and point w3af into it. > Agree, plus Nginx config > >> In your example you put something like %s and %d. Do we care if >> it's a string or a digit? Should the scanner change it's behavior >> based on that? > I think it is not so important on the first iteration. We can consider > all such tokens as strings. > > >> >> Regards, >> >>> >>>> This email is just a conversation starter for defining how we're >>>> going to deal with REST urls. >>>> >>>> REST, as described in [0], has two important moving parts: >>>> 1- URLs that "look nice" (no parameters: /people/1/phones/23 ) >>>> 2- Heavy usage of HTTP methods like GET, POST, DELETE, PUT. >>>> >>>> The first question that I would ask myself is... do we want to >>>> support 1 and 2? Only 1? What is really needed by our users? >>>> >>>> If we only want to implement #1, it should be easy enough, since >>>> we already have something similar (see: mutantFileName.py). This >>>> mutant, together with the fuzzer.py (more specifically >>>> _createFileNameMutants) will behave like this: >>>> >>>> - Original URL: http://host.tld/foo/spam-eggs.jsp >>>> - Input strings: [ '<script>alert(1)</script>', 'ping localhost'] >>>> - Output URLs: >>>> * http://host.tld/foo/<script>alert(1)</script>-eggs.jsp >>>> * http://host.tld/foo/spam-<script>alert(1)</script>.jsp >>>> * http://host.tld/foo/ping%20localhost-eggs.jsp >>>> * http://host.tld/foo/spam-ping%20localhost.jsp >>>> >>>> As you can see, it will split the filename using any character >>>> that's not a letter and put the strings into those positions. If we >>>> change this from just the filename into the whole path, it should work >>>> and inject into each URL section. >>>> >>>> Please note that the current implementation only performs file >>>> name fuzzing if misc-settings fuzzFileName is enabled (which is off by >>>> default). Should we also think about this and potentially modify this >>>> to true? >>>> >>>> Regarding #2 , I don't see a reason for it not to work with >>>> w3af... but I could be mistaken. We should perform some tests to check >>>> if w3af parses and correctly sends requests associated with forms that >>>> use PUT, DELETE, etc. The meta-question here is... do we want w3af to >>>> send requests that will "DELETE" stuff? >>>> >>>> Ok... that's enough for a conversation starter :) What do you guys >>>> think? >>>> >>>> [0] http://microformats.org/wiki/rest/urls >>>> >>>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Taras >>> http://oxdef.info >>> >> >> >> > > -- Taras http://oxdef.info ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ W3af-develop mailing list W3af-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/w3af-develop
