Lizzie Dixon (2016-10-14 14:55 -0700) wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/11, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: >> The default in Guile has been to expose a port over localhost to which >> code may be passed. The assumption for this is that only a local user >> may write to localhost, so it should be safe. Unfortunately, users >> simultaneously developing Guile and operating modern browsers are >> vulnerable to a combination of an html form protocol attack [1] and a >> DNS rebinding attack [2]. How to combine these attacks is published in >> the article "How to steal any developer's local database" [3]. > >> >> In Guile's case, the general idea is that you visit some site which >> presumably loads some javascript code (or tricks the developer into >> pressing a button which performs a POST), and the site operator switches >> the DNS from their own IP to 127.0.0.1. Then a POST is done from the >> website to 127.0.0.1 with the body containing scheme code. This code is >> then executed by the Guile interpreter on the listening port. > > You don't need to rebind DNS to exploit this bug, or other bugs like > it. I wrote some details here: > > <https://blog.lizzie.io/exploiting-CVE-2016-8606.html>
Wow, this is great! It's remarkable how you found ways to escape all this stuff in the code. I really enjoyed this reading, thanks a lot for sharing! -- Alex
