-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 402
Add functions to cover one half, the not encoded part, of issue 2509 #2567
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
Conversation
@theseion There is a warning we need to fix before merging |
Do you mean the "Github Actions syntax check"? |
The octothorp character in YAML starts a comment. Quoting line 90 prevents the parser from treating the GH issue number as a comment.
62e8caa
to
eb7d6ef
Compare
@fzipi should be fixed now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Shall we remove the |
Let me do a review first. |
Would appreciate that. The three PRs with the label are now really keeping back the BB PRs and we better get going with those. |
tests/regression/tests/REQUEST-933-APPLICATION-ATTACK-PHP/933160.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@fzipi @franbuehler LGTM. |
On behalf of @franbuehler
Replaces #2521 for v4.1/dev.
This PR tries to cover one half of issue #2512, the not Unicode encoded part, by adding some functions that were used in the bypass.
This PR only covers the reported functions, but maybe we should have a look at other document properties and not only document.domain (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document/domain).
And the same for atob(), btoa() and alert() (https://www.w3schools.com/jsref/obj_window.asp) -> I chose the PHP file because they have been mentioned together with eval() and the enhancement of this existing file was simple and quick. But maybe we should add a separate rule with Javascript functions instead of adding them to the existing PHP file?
Nevertheless, I'm pushing this PR now, also as a concrete basis for discussion. We can still make changes.
Next, we also need a PR to cover the Unicode part of the reported bypass. I'll have a look at this too.