Search Results

If you would inject PHP code, and it would execute, it would be code execution, not XSS. XSS is a vulnerability that happens client-side. … Everything a website can do with JavaScript, you can do with XSS. But you cannot change what happens server-side via XSS. …

Example: input=<<a|ascript>alert('xss');</script> This is because your regex does what you think it does: it searches for < followed by one or more alphanumeric character, followed by one or more non-alphanumeric … '">click me</a>'; } Example attack: input=" onmouseover="alert('xss') For more places where this kind of filtering is not good enough, see the owasp XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet. …

The issue is if you accept user input as part of the url you output, as in this example given by OWASP: <a href="http://www.somesite.com?test=[user input]">link</a > The attacker does not have to …

Bypass escaped double quote Based on your description this should work: \");alert("xss The " will be escaped as \", thus resulting in \\", which escapes the \, but not the ". … You can't use double quotes in the injected string, but that's not a problem as XSS with single quotes or completely without quotes is perfectly possibly. …

Can a hacker still get away with a XSS? Possibly, depending on the situation. … Here is a list with different contexts and how to handle them when preventing XSS. Is there any reason not to do this? Yes. …

Is CSS injection as bad as XSS? No, but there are still problems with it. …

If you know for sure that no user will ever be logged in, you can't really do that much with a reflected XSS vulnerability (you can't steal cookies, you can't post requests on their behalf, you can't perform …

You don't need quotes. One possibility would be to use String.fromCharCode: <script> document.location=String.fromCharCode(104, 116, 116, 112, 58, 47, 47, 101, 120, 97, 109, 112, 108, 101, 46, 99, 11 …

Is that header directly related to the anti-XSS filter in browser? Yes. The idea is that a value of 0 disables the filter, and 1 enables the filter. …

It might be vulnerable, but we can't tell reliably without more information. But first, you are not really escaping tags, you are closing tags. In most situations, closing tags is not necessary, as …

This doesn't seem dangerous as the content type isn't HTML: header( 'Content-Type: text/javascript; charset=utf-8' ); For specifics about XSS and content type text/javascript see eg Reflective XSS …

It's a payload for a sink inside a JavaScript string context. It might eg exploit the following vulnerable code: <script>var x = "[user input]";// process x</script> The payload uses confirm becaus …

There was a jQuery vulnerability in earlier version where $('#<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>') would lead to XSS, but that is fixed in recent versions. … $('<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>') still leads to XSS, but there is no way to get rid of the # (and the URL encoding would also still be in the way). …

I don't think we have a "why is XSS not working" question, so I'll try to add a canonical answer here. Why isn't XSS working? So you have a website, it takes your input and echoes it back to you. … Have you disabled your browsers XSS filter? If in doubt, use Firefox without plugins, as it doesn't have a filter. …

@Arminius covered it pretty well. But there are exceptions depending on the HTML attribute. Here are just two examples (others exist, mostly related to URLs, but onX and some other attributes are also …