Got it.
Appreciate your clarification, Christopher. I will keep post clear to
understand.:)


On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Christopher Schultz <
ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Viola,
>
> On 9/22/2010 11:29 PM, viola lu wrote:
> > thanks. I tried it on tomcat 6.0.26, and 6.0.29, it worked for the second
> > one, i can get correct response headers on tomcat 6.0.26 and tomcat
> 6.0.29:
> > tomcat 6.0.26
>
> What is "the first one" and "the second one"? The bugs you mentioned in
> your first post? Remember, not everyone is thinking what you're
> thinking: please be clear when posting.
>
> > suse10sp268:~ # wget -S -O - --post-data='test send post'
> > http://9.125.1.248:8080/BasicAuthor_without_realm/BasicAuthor
> > --07:21:33--
> http://9.125.1.248:8080/BasicAuthor_without_realm/BasicAuthor
> >            => `-'
> > Connecting to 9.125.1.248:8080... connected.
> > HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
> >   HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
> >   Server: Apache-Coyote/1.1
> >   *WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="9.125.1.248:8080"*
>
> Good: this reproduces the bug.
>
> > *tomcat 6.0.29:*
> > suse10sp268:~ # wget -S -O - --post-data='test send post'
> > http://9.125.1.248:8080/BasicAuthor_without_realm/BasicAuthor
> > --07:24:02--
> http://9.125.1.248:8080/BasicAuthor_without_realm/BasicAuthor
> > => `-'
> > Connecting to 9.125.1.248:8080... connected.
> > HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
> >   HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
> >   Server: Apache-Coyote/1.1
> >   *WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="Authentication required"*
>
> ...and this shows that the bug has been fixed: no IP and port.
>
> >  But for the first one, both got the same response: 200 OK as below:
> > suse10sp268:~ # wget -S -O - --header='Transfer-Encoding:unsupported'
> > --post-data='test send post'
> > http://9.125.1.248:8080/SecurityTomcat/SecurityServlet
> > --07:12:16--  http://9.125.1.248:8080/SecurityTomcat/SecurityServlet
> >            => `-'
> > Connecting to 9.125.1.248:8080... connected.
> > HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
> >   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
> >   Server: Apache-Coyote/1.1
> >   Content-Type: text/html
> >   Content-Length: 61
> >   Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:09:09 GMT
> >   Connection: keep-alive
> > Length: 61 [text/html]
> >  0%
> > [
> > ] 0             --.--K/s             unsupported
> > application/x-www-form-urlencoded
> > 9.125.1.248
> >
> 100%[=====================================================================================================================================>]
> > 61            --.--K/s
> >
> > 07:12:16 (7.27 MB/s) - `-' saved [61/61]
> >
> > Seems no difference on tomcat 6.0.26 and tomcat 6.0.29, is there
> something
> > wrong?
>
> Maybe this is sensitive to other conditions as well.
>
> On 9/24/2010 12:57 AM, viola lu wrote:
> > After debug into tomcat source code, i found that if transfer-encode is
> set
> > as 'buffered', tomcat 6.0.26 will report null pointer exception in
> buffered
> > filter recycle, but in tomcat 6.0.29 , directly report 501 error. But not
> > sure attackers how to obtain sensitive information via a crafted header?
>
> When buffers are not recycled properly, information /can/ leak across
> requests. This means that, under the right conditions, an attacker
> /might/ be able to exploit the server to disclose information.
>
> Just because a vulnerability does not have an exploit doesn't mean it's
> not a vulnerability: the possibility exists that information can be
> disclosed. It's not absolutely necessary to be able to actually steal
> information from a server to be considered a vulnerability.
>
> This one might not be reproducible in any predictable way.
>
> - -chris
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkycrgEACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDJMgCfZbZmJQzqGKx8vwQ6m7IGd+HV
> OR4AnjjvmJ37pfrQFtii+lUaRPruYaKD
> =vKvJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>


-- 
viola

Reply via email to