| Name |
XSS Targeting Non-Script Elements |
|
| Likelyhood of attack |
Typical severity |
| High |
Very High |
|
| Summary |
This attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where malicious scripts are embedded in elements that are not expected to host scripts such as image tags (<img>), comments in XML documents (< !-CDATA->), etc. These tags may not be subject to the same input validation, output validation, and other content filtering and checking routines, so this can create an opportunity for an attacker to tunnel through the application's elements and launch a XSS attack through other elements. As with all remote attacks, it is important to differentiate the ability to launch an attack (such as probing an internal network for unpatched servers) and the ability of the remote attacker to collect and interpret the output of said attack. |
| Prerequisites |
The target client software must allow the execution of scripts generated by remote hosts. |
| Execution Flow |
| Step |
Phase |
Description |
Techniques |
| 1 |
Explore |
[Spider] Using a browser or an automated tool, an attacker records all entry points for inputs that happen to be reflected in a client-side non-script element. These non-script elements can be located in the HTML content (head, body, comments), in an HTML tag, XML, CSS, etc. |
- Use a spidering tool to follow and record all non-static links that are likely to have input parameters (through forms, URL, fragments, etc.) actively used by the Web application.
- Use a proxy tool to record all links visited during a manual traversal of the web application.
- Use a browser to manually explore the website and analyze how it is constructed. Many browsers' plugins are available to facilitate the analysis or automate the discovery.
|
| 2 |
Experiment |
[Probe identified potential entry points for XSS vulnerability] The attacker uses the entry points gathered in the "Explore" phase as a target list and injects various common script payloads to determine if an entry point actually represents a vulnerability and to characterize the extent to which the vulnerability can be exploited. |
- Manually inject various script payloads into each identified entry point using a list of common script injection probes that typically work in a client-side non-script elements context and observe system behavior to determine if script was executed. Since these probes may have to be injected in many different types of non-script elements, they should cover a variety of possible contexts (CSS, HTML tag, XML, etc.).
- Use an automated injection attack tool to inject various script payloads into each identified entry point using a list of common script injection probes that typically work in a client-side non-script elements context and observe system behavior to determine if script was executed. Since these probes may have to be injected in many different types of non-script elements, they should cover a variety of possible contexts (CSS, HTML tag, XML, etc.).
- Use a proxy tool to record results of the created requests.
|
| 3 |
Exploit |
[Steal session IDs, credentials, page content, etc.] As the attacker succeeds in exploiting the vulnerability, they can choose to steal user's credentials in order to reuse or to analyze them later on. |
- Develop malicious JavaScript that is injected through vectors identified during the Experiment Phase and loaded by the victim's browser and sends document information to the attacker.
- Develop malicious JavaScript that injected through vectors identified during the Experiment Phase and takes commands from an attacker's server and then causes the browser to execute appropriately.
|
| 4 |
Exploit |
[Forceful browsing] When the attacker targets the current application or another one (through CSRF vulnerabilities), the user will then be the one who perform the attacks without being aware of it. These attacks are mostly targeting application logic flaws, but it can also be used to create a widespread attack against a particular website on the user's current network (Internet or not). |
- Develop malicious JavaScript that is injected through vectors identified during the Experiment Phase and loaded by the victim's browser and performs actions on the same web site
- Develop malicious JavaScript that injected through vectors identified during the Experiment Phase and takes commands from an attacker's server and then causes the browser to execute request to other web sites (especially the web applications that have CSRF vulnerabilities).
|
| 5 |
Exploit |
[Content spoofing] By manipulating the content, the attacker targets the information that the user would like to get from the website. |
- Develop malicious JavaScript that is injected through vectors identified during the Experiment Phase and loaded by the victim's browser and exposes attacker-modified invalid information to the user on the current web page.
|
|
| Solutions | In addition to the traditional input fields, all other user controllable inputs, such as image tags within messages or the likes, must also be subjected to input validation. Such validation should ensure that content that can be potentially interpreted as script by the browser is appropriately filtered. All output displayed to clients must be properly escaped. Escaping ensures that the browser interprets special scripting characters literally and not as script to be executed. |
| Related Weaknesses |
|
CWE ID
|
Description
|
| CWE-80 |
Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) |
|
| Related CAPECS |
|
CAPEC ID
|
Description
|
| CAPEC-588 |
This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is inserted into the client-side HTML being parsed by a web browser. Content served by a vulnerable web application includes script code used to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM). This script code either does not properly validate input, or does not perform proper output encoding, thus creating an opportunity for an adversary to inject a malicious script launch a XSS attack. A key distinction between other XSS attacks and DOM-based attacks is that in other XSS attacks, the malicious script runs when the vulnerable web page is initially loaded, while a DOM-based attack executes sometime after the page loads. Another distinction of DOM-based attacks is that in some cases, the malicious script is never sent to the vulnerable web server at all. An attack like this is guaranteed to bypass any server-side filtering attempts to protect users. |
| CAPEC-591 |
This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is "reflected" off a vulnerable web application and then executed by a victim's browser. The process starts with an adversary delivering a malicious script to a victim and convincing the victim to send the script to the vulnerable web application. The most common method of this is through a phishing email where the adversary embeds the malicious script with a URL that the victim then clicks on. In processing the subsequent request, the vulnerable web application incorrectly considers the malicious script as valid input and uses it to creates a reposnse that is then sent back to the victim. To launch a successful Reflected XSS attack, an adversary looks for places where user-input is used directly in the generation of a response. This often involves elements that are not expected to host scripts such as image tags (<img>), or the addition of event attibutes such as onload and onmouseover. These elements are often not subject to the same input validation, output encoding, and other content filtering and checking routines. |
| CAPEC-592 |
This type of attack is a form of Cross-site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is persistenly "stored" within the data storage of a vulnerable web application. Initially presented by an adversary to the vulnerable web application, the malicious script is incorrectly considered valid input and is not properly encoded by the web application. A victim is then convinced to use the web application in a way that creates a response that includes the malicious script. This response is subsequently sent to the victim and the malicious script is executed by the victim's browser. To launch a successful Stored XSS attack, an adversary looks for places where stored input data is used in the generation of a response. This often involves elements that are not expected to host scripts such as image tags (<img>), or the addition of event attibutes such as onload and onmouseover. These elements are often not subject to the same input validation, output encoding, and other content filtering and checking routines. |
|