SQL injection in Symfony/Doctrine - orm

Using parameters instead of placing values directly in the query string is done to prevent SQL injection attacks and should always be done:
... WHERE p.name > :name ...
->setParameter('name', 'edouardo')
Does this mean that if we use parameters like this, we will always be protected against SQL injections? While using a form (registration form of FOS), I put <b>eduardo</b> instead and this was persisted to the database with the tags. I don't really understand why using parameters is preventing against SQL injections...
Why are the tags persisted to the database like this? Is there a way to remove the tags by using Symfony's validation component?
Is there a general tip or method that we should be using before persisting data in the database in Symfony?

Start with reading on what's SQL injection.
SQL injection attack takes place when value put into the SQL alters the query. As a result the query performs something else that it was intended to perform.
Example would be using edouardo' OR '1'='1 as a value which would result in:
WHERE p.name > 'edouardo' OR '1'='1'
(so the condition is always true).
"<b>eduardo</b>" is a completely valid value. In some cases you will want to save it as submited (for example content management system). Of course it could break your HTML when you take it from the database and output directly. This should be solved by your templating engine (twig will automatically escape it).
If you want process data before passing it from a form to your entity use data transformers.

If you use parameters instead of concatenation when creating a request, the program is able to tell SQL keywords and values apart. It can therefore safely escape values that may contain malicious SQL code, so that this malicious does not get executed, but stored in a field, like it should.
HTML code injection is another problem, which has nothing to do with databases. This problem is solved when displaying the value, by using automatic output escaping, which will display <b>eduardo</b> instead of eduardo. This way, any malicious js / html code won't be interpreted : it will be displayed.

Related

How to receive SQL syntax error using SQL injection?

I'm doing some webpentesting exercises and there is this one task saying that I need to make a new account with this name and this password by using SQL injection. On the web page there is a text input username and another text input 'password'. I can enter whatever characters I want inside the username text-input but inside the password text input I need to type a specific injection.
I know I need to inject insert query but the thing is I don't know the table name. In order to insert a new user I need to know the table name so I'm wondering how can I make the web showing me an error with tablename revealed.
The error showing should be like:
Unexpected end of command in statement [SELECT * FROM (tablename) WHERE...]
I tried to enter with just one character (maybe >1 chars are required) inside the password field to make the error show or even delete the parameter text input password. But it just won't show the SQL syntax error.
So the question is: How can I make use of the exploit to make the web page view the SQL syntax error with table name revealed?
And why doesn't injection work on username field but it does on password field?
The first thing is understand the difference between "application" errors (for example, "the user doesn't exist") and execution errors, in which the application fails itself, like the "Unexpected end of command" you mention. The first case is not usually a problem from the security point of view (unless the application is very badly programmed), the second one is what could allow hacking.
A well programmed web application should ideally only have application errors, but the more realistic approach is cope with unexpected execution errors in way that don't make it vulnerable. Also, application should process any user input in a way that don't cause an execution error.
It seems that they are teaching you the most flagrant case that allows SQL injection, apps than don't do any processing to user input (so it's very easy put text in an input field that cause an execution error), and that don't cope with execution errors (in this case, showing the internal execution message to the user).
A common mistake in web applications is constructing the SQL query with string concatenation, so the simplest way of make it fail is using the string delimiter (') in a field, causing the string value to end prematurely. In an sloppy web app it would cause an execution error that shows the full error message, usually including the table name.
From there you craft a SQL query in the input field that insert the user in the table, you could find examples online (note that you need at least basic knowledge on SQL and PHP (or ASP, Java, etc.), in order to do SQL injection, since you need to know how the database access works in order to make it fail).
Finally, SQL injection could work in any input field that is not properly processed, but it depends on how the application is programmed. I suppose that both fields would work but it will be easy do that with the password field because probably is the last one in the SQL query.

Values for parameterised queries

I have a SQL statement String in Java which contains, among other things, the segment:
" AND \"Reference_No\" > ? "
I understand that this is a parameterized query, where the statement is precompiled and the parameters then added, in order to prevent injection attacks.
However, every example I've seen of this used, I have always seen accompanying code where the parameter values are then hard-coded in using some kind of setter method with code that runs something like:
setValue(1, "value1");
The program I am trying to understand does not appear to have this accompanying code, and I am trying to understand at what point a value is added to this SQL statement.
The application which uses this is a webUI servlet that sends and receives job transactions. More specifically, I am looking at the page that lists pending transactions.
I have a method which contains the following:
List<Job> query = getJdbcTemplate().query(sql.toString(),
new Object[]{minRef},
rowMapper);
sql contains the SQL statement segment in question.
Is the value-adding dealt with by the JdbcTemplate class? If so, how does it determine the values?

SQL Parameters - where does expansion happens

I'm getting a little confused about using parameters with SQL queries, and seeing some things that I can't immediately explain, so I'm just after some background info at this point.
First, is there a standard format for parameter names in queries, or is this database/middleware dependent ? I've seen both this:-
DELETE * FROM #tablename
and...
DELETE * FROM :tablename
Second - where (typically) does the parameter replacement happen? Are parameters replaced/expanded before the query is sent to the database, or does the database receive params and query separately, and perform the expansion itself?
Just as background, I'm using the DevArt UniDAC toolkit from a C++Builder app to connect via ODBC to an Excel spreadsheet. I know this is almost pessimal in a few ways... (I'm trying to understand why a particular command works only when it doesn't use parameters)
With such data access libraries, like UniDAC or FireDAC, you can use macros. They allow you to use special markers (called macro) in the places of a SQL command, where parameter are disallowed. I dont know UniDAC API, but will provide a sample for FireDAC:
ADQuery1.SQL.Text := 'DELETE * FROM &tablename';
ADQuery1.MacroByName('tablename').AsRaw := 'MyTab';
ADQuery1.ExecSQL;
Second - where (typically) does the parameter replacement happen?
It doesn't. That's the whole point. Data elements in your query stay data items. Code elements stay code elements. The two never intersect, and thus there is never an opportunity for malicious data to be treated as code.
connect via ODBC to an Excel spreadsheet... I'm trying to understand why a particular command works only when it doesn't use parameters
Excel isn't really a database engine, but if it were, you still can't use a parameter for the name a table.
SQL parameters are sent to the database. The database performs the expansion itself. That allows the database to set up a query plan that will work for different values of the parameters.
Microsoft always uses #parname for parameters. Oracle uses :parname. Other databases are different.
No database I know of allows you to specify the table name as a parameter. You have to expand that client side, like:
command.CommandText = string.Format("DELETE FROM {0}", tableName);
P.S. A * is not allowed after a DELETE. After all, you can only delete whole rows, not a set of columns.

query string sql injection

Examining some logs in my web site, I discovered that a bunch of querystring variables contains sql injection snippets:
'myvalue AND CHAR(124) USER CHAR(124)=0 AND ='
'myvalue AND 1=2'
How do you sanitize the querystring variables?
The platform is ASP.NET, fm 4.0, SQL Server 2008. So go with the parametrized query. But there is a part of the application (an old one) running classic ASP. There is no parametrized query in classic ASP...
You shouldn't worry about sanitizing query string values.
You should worry about writing code that doesn't have SQL Injection vectors to begin with. Parameterized Queries are the way to go. Depending on your platform, the exact SQL can vary a bit.
As it seems you already know how to work with parameterized queries in .NET, I'll skip that.
As for the Classic ASP page, you should take a look at How To Call a Parameterized Query with ADO (paying special attention to the change at the bottom to use a SQL Statement rather than a Stored Procedure).
I think I had two websites of mine hacked by such a hack! The way to stop the hack is to check the data being read before it hits the database.
If the value is a number check the string has only chars 0-9 in it, if not send them to the page not found!
If you are using strings like 'yes', 'no', 'true', 'false', values that you define don't add them to the database string directly, check for them with an if such as,
If(request("dog").equals("true")){...
finally if the value is a string that the client has entered then watch for ' char. An insertion hack works by first closing the string with ' then the expression with ; and then adding and update, insert or delete statement. so if ' ; and for good luck " is escaped the string cannot be closed.
Note: the same thing is true for text boxes, form sends and Ajax.
Always do these checks on the server as a hacker can always fake a page.

How much sanitizing is needed for Web Services that call Stored Procedures?

I am building a series of web services in VB.Net
Each of the web services takes multiple string values, performs some validation/processing then calls a Stored Procedure using Linq to SQL. Some of the string contains user data that is stored in the database:
These string values passed from the web service are escaped to trap single quote characters, semi colons and the various bracket types.
I am calling the SP using the datacontext.spname(parameter1, parameter2) method.
The aim is to ensure that the web services are as resilient as possible, while still being performant.
Have I done enough to prevent SQL injection attacks?
Usually you are good, but there are a few caveats:
Careful of stored procs that use sp_executesql or exec. You can pass in a query in the param and end up executing it.
Careful with LIKE sections of queries cause they can be widened with % if likened to a param.
Fields used in webpages may need some extra processing before being sent in, to avoid cross site scripting. (which you should also defend against when pulling information out)
I know for a fact that LINQ to SQL queries all the data send to the database via SQL parameters -- which keeps you safe from SQL injection. I'm not entirely sure, but since LINQ abstracts the stored procedure, it too most likely passes the arguments to the stored procedures in the same manner.
What does that mean? You don't have to worry about sanitizing your data because LINQ will take care of it. You could of course test it out with a simple SQL injection type attack -- something like a harmless insert or select.
If you're using parameters then you don't need to sanitise at all as single quotes and the other sql injection nasties get escaped for you.
It's probably a bad idea to sanitise on input depending on the data you're storing. If you're storing things that end up embedded in a web page and you encode/sanitise them on data entry what happens if your sanitation code has a bug? You end up with data in the database that will cause problems on output and no easy way to fix it without an update over all your data. It's better to sanitise when you output data as corrections to the sanitation code will then run against all data. You also have the advantage of easier searching in SQL should that be a concern.
I'd limit the web service to obvious things, null and range checks.