It’s you can modify the settings file you sure as hell can put the malware anywhere you want
True. (But in case it amuses you or others reading along:) But a code settings file still carries it’s own special risk, as an executable file, in a predictable place, that gets run regularly.
An executable settings file is particularly nice for the attacker, as it’s a great place to ensure that any injected code gets executed without much effort.
In particular, if an attacker can force a reboot, they know the settings file will get read reasonably early during the start-up process.
So a settings file that’s written in code can be useful for an attacker who can write to the disk (like through a poorly secured upload prompt), but doesn’t have full shell access yet.
They will typically upload a reverse shell, and use a line added to settings to ensure the reverse shell gets executed and starts listening for connections.
Edit (because it may also amuse anyone reading along): The same attack can be accomplished with a JSON or YAML settings file, but it relies on the JSON or YAML interpreter having a known critical security flaw. Thankfully most of them don’t usually have one, most of the time, if they’re kept up to date.
In this instance, I think there was some suggestion to write code in mostly lower case, including all user variables, or at least inCamelCaseLikeThis with a leading lower case letter, and so to make True and False stand out, they’ve got to be capitalised.
I mean. They could have been TRUE and FALSE. Would that have been preferable? Or how about a slightly more Pythonic style: __true__ and __false__
Depends on how it’s set up. If the setting is going into the env it’s a string, so I’d expect some sort of
if os.getenv("this_variable", "false").lower() == "true": # or maybe "in true, yes, on, 1" if you want to be weird like yaml
this_variable = Trueelse:
this_variable = False
Except maybe a little more elegant and not typed on my phone.
But if the instructions are telling the user to edit the settings directly, like where I wrote this_variable=True, they’d need to case it correctly there.
true, though sometimes i find the more verbose style easier to read, and more maintainable (eg: you want to do something else in the block, you can just add a line instead of changing your ternary / etc). Small things
Is the backend Python and the frontend JavaScript? Because then that would happen and just be normal, because Boolean true is
Truein python.Probably, but if you’re interpreting user inputs as raw code, you’ve got much much worse problems going on, lol.
[...]®ister=import os; os.system("sudo rm -rf /"); return TrueHey, that’s my username too. Or it was going to be, while the site was still up.
What a coincidence!
I guess I’ll wait for the site to come back, and see if it’s still available…
It’s the settiings file… It’s probably supposed to only be written by the system admin.
A good place to put persistent malware. That’s why when using docker images always mount as ro if at all possible.
It’s you can modify the settings file you sure as hell can put the malware anywhere you want
True. (But in case it amuses you or others reading along:) But a code settings file still carries it’s own special risk, as an executable file, in a predictable place, that gets run regularly.
An executable settings file is particularly nice for the attacker, as it’s a great place to ensure that any injected code gets executed without much effort.
In particular, if an attacker can force a reboot, they know the settings file will get read reasonably early during the start-up process.
So a settings file that’s written in code can be useful for an attacker who can write to the disk (like through a poorly secured upload prompt), but doesn’t have full shell access yet.
They will typically upload a reverse shell, and use a line added to settings to ensure the reverse shell gets executed and starts listening for connections.
Edit (because it may also amuse anyone reading along): The same attack can be accomplished with a JSON or YAML settings file, but it relies on the JSON or YAML interpreter having a known critical security flaw. Thankfully most of them don’t usually have one, most of the time, if they’re kept up to date.
I curse the sadist who decided True should be uppercase in Python
guido, why did you make python so weird?
In this instance, I think there was some suggestion to write code in mostly lower case, including all user variables, or at least inCamelCaseLikeThis with a leading lower case letter, and so to make True and False stand out, they’ve got to be capitalised.
I mean. They could have been TRUE and FALSE. Would that have been preferable? Or how about a slightly more Pythonic style: __true__ and __false__
Can’t they just convert a “true” input to backend to uppercase
Depends on how it’s set up. If the setting is going into the env it’s a string, so I’d expect some sort of
if os.getenv("this_variable", "false").lower() == "true": # or maybe "in true, yes, on, 1" if you want to be weird like yaml this_variable = True else: this_variable = FalseExcept maybe a little more elegant and not typed on my phone.
But if the instructions are telling the user to edit the settings directly, like where I wrote this_variable=True, they’d need to case it correctly there.
Fyi, using a condition to assign a boolean is equivalent to assigning the condition itself. No need for the IF.
true, though sometimes i find the more verbose style easier to read, and more maintainable (eg: you want to do something else in the block, you can just add a line instead of changing your ternary / etc). Small things