Good Morning Jeromy so for my own edification includeParams != none which essentially covers "HTTP GET" and "HTTP POST" transmissions?
There also seems to be a bug with treatment of URLs in AnchorTag classes specifically public class AnchorTagTest extends AbstractUITagTest { private StringWriter writer = new StringWriter(); private AnchorTag tag; protected void setUp() throws Exception { super.setUp(); request.setScheme("http"); request.setServerName("localhost"); request.setServerPort(80); tag = new AnchorTag(); tag.setPageContext(pageContext); JspWriter jspWriter = new StrutsMockJspWriter(writer); pageContext.setJspWriter(jspWriter); } public void testActionURL() throws Exception { tag.setHref("TestAction.action"); // where is this method ? tag.doStartTag(); tag.doEndTag(); assertTrue(writer.toString().indexOf("href=\"TestAction.action\"") > -1); assertEquals("<a href=\"TestAction.action\"></a>", writer.toString()); } where AnchorTag has no setHref method..? I think I should update JIRA? Thanks Martin ----- Original Message ----- Wrom: AIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZ To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:11 AM Subject: Re: Feedback: WW-2414, XSS attack is possible if using <s:url ...> and <s:a ...> > I don't think this is a critical problem sheerly because the high > prevalence of such vulnerabilities means some of the responsibility > falls on the developer to not trust user-entered data.. The specific > vulnerability is that when includeParams != none, the request URL was > rendered unmodified within the HTML because the developer chose to use > it in an anchor. > > I guess the proposal is that if encode=true, the entire URL query > section should be URL encoded and not just the additional parameters? Is > that right? > > Interestingly, encoding may not completely eliminate the vulnerability. > In IE6 <a href="javascript%3Aalert%28%27hello%27%29"> doesn't execute > the javascript, but also doesn't issue the request for a page of that name. > > GF wrote: > > Of course, > > to raise this security issues, the includeParams attribute parameter > > of <s:url should be different by "none" > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]