New answers tagged

0

Usually, not secure at all. It really depends on your threat model, but the data is usually saved: unencrypted, encrypted with a publicly-known passwords or encrypted with a user given master password On Windows (I believe 7 and over) Chrome uses an OS facility for the storage, which ties the encryption to the logged in user. On Linux systems Chrome ...


0

I can think of three caveats. 1) Make sure the uploaded files dont end up somewhere where they can be executed. (eg your web server folder) Otherwise scripts (for example php) can be uploaded and called/executed through the web server. 2) Continuing on this line of thinking, I think the webserver MAY dictate the filename if not set explicitly by wget. Thus ...


3

You are basically correct with a couple bits of complexity. First, it is still possible that both wget or your text editor might have a vulnerability that the page could be designed to try and exploit. This is unlikely, and the malware author would have to predict that you would use this process and plant an ambush. Unlikely, but it still means that your ...


1

Lee Brotherston spoke at DerbyCon 2015 on Stealthier Attacks and Smarter Defending with TLS Fingerprinting -- slides -- video. He also released code to go along with the talk -- https://github.com/LeeBrotherston/tls-fingerprinting/tree/master/fingerprintls The below is taken from his website -- http://blog.squarelemon.com/tls-fingerprinting/ Transport ...


-2

Every operating system installer packages are signed. In Windows for example, when you download Firefox Installer Stub, you can check it's properties by right-clicking on the exe file and going to "Signature" tab: Then, click on "Details" to see more, you will see "Signer Information" and whatever it's "OK" which is checked with Windows built-in ...


0

Firstly, you are right, it is a recursive problem. SSL is sort of a house of cards because you always have to trust something, including the folks that are telling you who to trust. A number of experts have predicted the collapse of SSL: Security Collapse in the HTTPS Market SSL/TLS encryption and the vacant lot scam: Too big to fail How is SSL ...


0

To directly answer your question: no, but read on. The question is slightly unclear in that it asks about "data on websites opened". If by data, you mean "can a tab see the contents of another tab", then no. The attack would come from JavaScript, a language whose security model is reference-based. Even if the rules on existing mechanisms are ignored ...


0

The origin constraint is between the active script (script in that specific browser tab) and the script that gets called. It doesn't matter how you open other tabs, they are not part of the exchange and have no impact on it, except for possible opened sessions. Active sessions will not affect the same origin constraint either.


2

The --disable-web-security option applies to the entire Chrome application, not to a particular window. If you enable this option when starting Chrome, then any site you visit can access data from sites you visited earlier. For example if I was looking at my Online Banking account, and then closed that tab and navigated to a malicious site, that malicious ...


1

You are confusing CORS with SOP. CORS enables Cross Origin Resource Sharing(unless authorized by the receiver), while SOP Ensures the Data is being accessed by the Same origin that created it. So by CORS you can't access other Tab's/Frame's data, unless you can execute JavaScript there. More on CORS & SOP. There is no way you can cross SOP, unless you'...


0

You could definitely hijack the session by getting cookies, if you can execute the Javascript in that page/frame by sending the message. Refer : How to send cross domain post request via javascript The minimal requirement here is, you'll need a server which you control. So that you can configure the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header of the response ...


0

Generate a self-signed certificate compounded of a certificate and a private key for the server. Command used is openssl req -new -x509 -keyout server.pem -out server.pem -days 365 -nodes Create an index.html file. Start a python https server using the below code in the same directory where the index.html file is. import BaseHTTPServer, SimpleHTTPServer ...


4

The error message indicates that the server expected a HTTP request but got a HTTPS request: \x16\x03\x01\ is the start of an TLS record. This probably means that your server configuration is wrong, i.e. that the server expects HTTP on port 443 and not HTTPS.


1

All major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, IE 11 and Edge) use a HSTS preload list of Chromium. You can check the eligibility and register the website to be included in the HSTS preload list on the https://hstspreload.appspot.com page. As of today, the requirements are: Have a valid certificate. Redirect from HTTP to HTTPS on the same ...


0

I just wanted to append my thoughts to this since I've been recently going through the same thing. All my attempts of trying to get ECDHE with SunEC have been pretty unsuccessful, so I'd strongly recommend just using Bouncy Castle. You just add the provider jar to your JRE/JDK ext folders and modify your security providers in your java security file and ...


1

I use Tab Mix Plus plugin in Firefox and configure it to turn all pop-up/new window into tabs. This also prevents Javascript from bringing tabs into the foreground/background. You can additionally configure it to disallow scripts from changing window size and position, so accurate placement is impossible. A similar plugin may exist for other browsers.


0

Browsers generally include click-jacking protection for their internal popups. For example to keep you from accidentally opening a downloaded file without realizing what you are doing. However, in the scenario you describe, the responsibility of protection is at the site that hosts the Allow Access button. (in this case, Google) There is no 100% fooluser-...


0

Why you're safe against Poodle The Poodle Attack is against a very specific type of cipher that in combination with SSLv3.0 would lead to an attack vector. Avoiding those vulnerable types of ciphers prevents you from being attacked with that vector. That vector is no longer an angle of attack, so you can safely use SSLv3.0 without worry(hopefully). However ...


4

The user can modify and delete anything stored in their browser. Any malware installed in the user's system with the user's privilege can also do so. The system administrator can also modify and delete anything stored in any user's browser. Any malware with the administrator's privilege can do the same. Another non privileged user in the same system ...


2

The risk isn't that a script such as http://attacker.com/omg.php runs on your domain, it is that a user manages to break out of the <div style='background-image: url("http://example.com/image.jpg")'></div> context where the URL is written to the page. Note the code has been corrected from your question (single quotes used for HTML attribute ...


1

I found a way to prevent the use of this API using javascript. Worked for me in chrome and firefox (Desktop version). (function(navi){ var nnav = new Proxy(navi,{ get:function(t,p){ if(p == "getBattery" || p == "battery"){ return void(0); } if(t[p] instanceof Function){ return t[p].bind(navi); ...



Top 50 recent answers are included