Skip to main content

Preventing Directory Traversal attacks in PHP

Directory traversal attacks occur when your program reads or writes a file where the name is based on some sort of input that can be maliciously tampered with.  When used in conjunction with log poisoning this can lead to an attacker gaining remote shell access to your server.

At the most simple it could be to include a file like this:

echo file_get_contents($_GET['sidebar']);

The intention would be for you to be able to call your URL and send a parameter indicating which sidebar content you want to load... like this:  http://foo.bar/myfile.php?sidebar=adverts.html

Which is really terrible practice and would not be done by any experienced developer.

Another common place where directory traversal attacks can occur is in displaying content based on a database call.

If you are reading from or writing to a file based on some input (like GET, POST, COOKIE, etc) then make sure that you remove paths.  The PHP function basename will strip out paths and make sure that you are left only with a filename.

This is still not foolproof, however, as an attacker would still be able to read files in the same directory.

A safer way to do it is to whitelist the files that are allowed to be included.  Whitelisting is safer than blacklisting, so instead of trying to exclude all malicious combinations we will rather allow only a set of safe options to be used.

Consider the following code as an alternative to the above:

$page = $_GET['page'];
$allowedPages = array('adverts','contacts','information');
if ( in_array($page, $allowedPages) ) 
{
    echo file_get_contents(basename($page . '.html'));
}

You should consider configuring PHP to disallow opening remote urls with the file stream wrapper by setting allow_url_fopen to Off in your php.ini file.  This does mean that you can't use any function that relies on the file stream (like file_get_contents) to read a URL (you'll need to use curl instead) but it does prevent an attacker from including their own code into your site.

On a system configuration scale it's ideal to have each site running in a chroot jail.  By locking down access to the user that your webserver runs under to a specific directory you can limit the impact of a traversal attack.

So in summary:

  1. Use basename() on any variable you use to include a file
  2. Set allow_url_fopen PHP setting to Off
  3. Set a whitelist of files that you allow to be included


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Using Fail2Ban to protect a Varnished site from scrapers

I'm using Varnish to cache a fairly busy property site.  Varnish works like a bomb for normal users and has greatly improved our page load speed. For bots that are scraping the site, presumably to add the property listings to their own site, though the cache is next to useless since the bots are sequentially trawling through the whole site. I decided to use fail2ban to block IP's who hit the site too often. The first step in doing so was to enable a disk based access log for Varnish so that fail2ban will have something to work with. This means setting up varnishncsa.  Add this to your /etc/rc.local file: varnishncsa -a -w /var/log/varnish/access.log -D -P /var/run/varnishncsa.pid This starts up varnishncsa in daemon mode and appends Varnish access attempts to /var/log/varnish/access.log Now edit or create /etc/logrotate.d/varnish and make an entry to rotate this access log: /var/log/varnish/*log { create 640 http log compress ...

Translating a bit of the idea behind domain driven design into code architecture

I've often participated in arguments discussions about whether thin models or thin controllers should be preferred.  The wisdom of a thin controller is that if you need to test your controller in isolation then you need to stub the dependencies of your request and response. It also violates the single responsibility principal because the controller could have multiple reasons to change.   Seemingly, the alternative is to settle on having fat models. This results in having domain logic right next to your persistence logic. If you ever want to change your persistence layer you're going to be in for a painful time. That's a bit of a cargo cult argument because honestly who does that, but it's also a violation of the single responsibility principal.   One way to decouple your domain logic from both persistence and controller is to use the "repository pattern".   Here we encapsulate domain logic into a data service. This layer deals exclusively with imple...

Separating business logic from persistence layer in Laravel

There are several reasons to separate business logic from your persistence layer.  Perhaps the biggest advantage is that the parts of your application which are unique are not coupled to how data are persisted.  This makes the code easier to port and maintain. I'm going to use Doctrine to replace the Eloquent ORM in Laravel.  A thorough comparison of the patterns is available  here . By using Doctrine I am also hoping to mitigate the risk of a major version upgrade on the underlying framework.  It can be expected for the ORM to change between major versions of a framework and upgrading to a new release can be quite costly. Another advantage to this approach is to limit the access that objects have to the database.  Unless a developer is aware of the business rules in place on an Eloquent model there is a chance they will mistakenly ignore them by calling the ActiveRecord save method directly. I'm not implementing the repository pattern in all its ...