Contributed by Diabolic Crab from many years ago from the old Infosecwriters archives

This is a fairly new web application vulnerability. It can be used for the following purposes.

Cross site scripting (XSS): This is a very common and old form of vulnerability where it allows the user execution of html or java script code which can then lead to the hijacking of the user's cookie or session. They even allow _javascript code execution and maybe used to exploit other vulnerabilities in browsers with more anonymity.


Bypassing non-executable-stack during exploitation using return-to-libc

Contributed by C0ntex back in 2004 from the old Infosecwriters archives

Returning to libc is a method of exploiting a buffer overflow on a system that has a non-executable stack, it is very similar to a standard buffer overflow, in that the return address is changed to point at a new location that we can control. However since no executable code is allowed on the stack we can't just tag in shellcode.

This is the reason we use the return into libc trick and utilize a function provided by the library. We still overwrite the return address with one of a function in libc, pass it the correct arguments and have that execute for us. Since these functions do not reside on the stack, we can bypass the stack protection and execute code.


Stack-Based Buffer Overflow Explained

Contributed by Marc Koser.

This paper is intended to demystify the complicated subject of stack-based overflows. I have written this paper for people who may not have a background in computer science. I explain what a buffer is, what the different parts of a buffer are used for, how to craft a buffer overflow, and what happens when a buffer overflow is executed on a victim. Additionally, I explain common payloads and exploits that are run in the attack, and investigate post-exploitation activities.


Mobile Device Attacks

Contributed by Vicki Holzknecht.

comScore reported for the month of September, the top two smartphone market share holders in the United States are Android, 52.1% and Apple, 41.7% (Lella, 2014). Many users go about their day checking /sending email, text messaging, sharing photos on social media sites without ever thinking about the security angle of their daily activities performed on mobile device. In May 2014, ConsumerReports discovered thirty-four percent of the smartphone users did not enable any security features on device (Tapellini, 2014). Last year alone, mobile malware attacks rapidly grew to one hundred and sixty-seven percent (Vinton, 2014); approximately 100,000 malicious programs for mobile devices were detected (Hilburn, 2014). This paper is broken down into the following areas: Mobile Attacks and Don’t Be A Victim.


Vulnerabilities and Prevention of Session Hijacking

Contributed by Taylor Charles.


Subscribe to RSS - Exploitation