Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider more proactive sanitizing of inputs and output in API #371

Open
kltm opened this issue Mar 10, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Consider more proactive sanitizing of inputs and output in API #371

kltm opened this issue Mar 10, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Mar 10, 2021

From geneontology#11, it looks like some bot was doing some gentle probing of the API using SQL injection to try and find a way in. It naturally didn't do much as there is no SQL backend, etc. (at this point anyways), but it does highlight something that can become problematic. As well, it triggered a firewall bot to (correctly IMO) block the source, which unfortunately broke an application.

I would suggest that it might be good to consider, at least as a thought moving forward, a more proactive stance to prevent things like this from propagating through the API. Basic input sanity checks might help prevent future issues from cropping up (from one of the libraries that do this) .

From LBL security commentary at geneontology#11:

http://131.243.192.30/solr/select?q=*:*&qf=&fq=document_category:\"ontology_class\"&fl=annotation_class,annotation_class_label,description,source&wt=json&indent=on&fq=subset:goslim_agr and 1=1&rows=1000

1=1 is likely what triggered the sql injection attack! 

More abstractly, from a Solr perspective, depending on setup, problems with the underlying server could still be theoretically exposed if a pass-through exists; e.g.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-announce/201902.mbox/%3CCAECwjAVjBN%3DwO5rYs6ktAX-5%3D-f5JDFwbbTSM2TTjEbGO5jKKA%40mail.gmail.com%3E
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12770

Something to bear in mind anyways, in case any other deployment site has similar issues.

@kshefchek kshefchek self-assigned this Mar 18, 2021
@kshefchek kshefchek removed their assignment Dec 17, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants