From following news, http://thehackernews.com/2012/12/etsy-for-iphone-loophole-allows.html
Someone just setup a proxy to intercept traffic between browser and https protocol, then it called vulnerability for 750 USD?
|
From following news, http://thehackernews.com/2012/12/etsy-for-iphone-loophole-allows.html Someone just setup a proxy to intercept traffic between browser and https protocol, then it called vulnerability for 750 USD? |
|||
|
|
|
The article simply doesn't contain enough information to asses the situation. Sending a password (without further encryption/hashing) over SSL/HTTPS is secure, if SSL is used correctly. Perhaps the certificate validation was insufficient, allowing a MitM on SSL. (One of the comments claims that this was the case for your example.) If you don't validate the certificate the server sends to you, an attacker can impersonate the server. In such a scenario the information still gets encrypted, but with a key the attacker chooses. Against active attackers, SSL is only as secure as your certificate validation. |
|||||
|
|
According to the article, the login credentials were sent in cleartext upon submission. This is definitely a critical vulnerability as an attacker doesn't really need any other information to take over the user account and do whatever they please with it. |
|||
|
|
|
A vulnerability simply refers to the fact that password and username are send out in clear text. Important data should always be encrypted. With information in clear text man in the middle attack can be use to sniff the traffic and modifying it for the attacker own purpose. |
|||||||||||
|