Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Martin McKeay's picture
Martin McKeay

Security Matters

Responsible Disclosure? - Paypal vulnerable for two years

In any argument there are going to be extremes that support either opinion.  Paypal has done me a favor in giving me a great example of where responsible disclosure didn't workChris Marlow tried to notify Paypal in June of 2004 of a Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be used as part of a phishing attack against Paypal users.  Apparently Paypal's own internal processes prevented Chris from being able to contact anyone at the company who could actually understand the seriousness of the situation.  Fast forward to last month, when Netcraft reported on the same vulnerability.  Paypal's response was appropriate, but only because Netcraft is a well-known name in the Internet community.

Earlier this week I posted advocating 'immediate disclosure' rather than responsible disclosure.  However, even I think immediate disclosure might not be the answer; it's just better than the current solution.  The problem with our responsible disclosure, as it stands, is that it's up to the vendor to decide what's reasonable and responsible, not the discoverer of the vulnerability or a third party.  There isn't even an agreed upon standard of what is a reasonable length of time to wait between notifying the vendor and releasing the vulnerability to the public.  Rumor has it that many of the IE exploits HD Moore is releasing were reported to Microsoft over six months ago.  And Microsoft is a company that has clearly defined methods of reporting vulnerabilities. 

Responsible disclosure has been tried, and while it's not a total failure, it's not a total success either.  Vendors are sitting on vulnerabilities for much longer than can reasonably be called 'responsible'.  If they want responsible disclosure, it can't just mean that security researchers act in a responsible way. It means that the vendors have to act responsibly too.  Many vendors are, but there are also a large number that aren't, and then claiming researchers are abusing the system when they disclose. 

We need to come up with a system that clearly defines how a vendor gets notified and what is a reasonable time frame to wait between notification and disclosure.  I don't like the idea of a central database run by US-CERT or some other central, government run organization.  The IEEE has tried multiple times to define responsible disclosure guidelines without luck, but it may be time for them to address the problem again.  Of course, even if we do come up with a solution that satisfies vendors and researchers, it's only going to affect the people who play by the rules.  The crackers are still going to share vulnerabilities in the backrooms of the Internet long before we hear about them.

What People Are Saying

Right said, vendors need to

Right said, vendors need to understand their responsibility. But, immediate disclosure might cause lot of loss for the vendor. Vulnerability fix might require lot of efforts and time and if its immediately disclosed, then vendor might get into big tome trouble. So I personally feel that ethical way is to inform the vendor and keep a follow-up with vendor till the time vulnerability is not fixed. If vendor says that they are not concerned about such problems then surely we should proceed forward for public disclosure. I know vendor are not too serious about security and its little disturbing for security researchers. Attitude of vendors is now changing slowly and gradually.

I have encountered similar

I have encountered similar situations with vendors. We will perform application security checks and balances with our apps. We have encountered vendors were their applications are either wide open to SQL injection or CSS attacks. We will notify them and they won't make any attempts to rectify the problem immediately. We gotten responses, indicating they believe these to be of low concern and will pass the information on to their IT group.

Your link "advocating

Your link "advocating 'immediate disclosure'" to "http://www.computerworld.com/node/2998" is a 404.

This PayPal example is a

This PayPal example is a perfect point of when under responsible disclosure you have to go public. However, don't confuse the exception with the rule. For every PayPal, there are 10's of other vendors who respond promptly and don't make the news.

I love this quote, "If they

I love this quote, "If they want responsible disclosure, it can't just mean that security researchers act in a responsible way." Very good point.

Michael

Better be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident security.
Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Thanks for this very

Thanks for this very informative article.
I hope this will open more than just a few eyes regarding PayPal's dismal security record as well as it's apparent overall lack of concern for its users.