3 ms·
I agree this could become a big issue - but I wouldn't consider it a "security vulnerability" per se. URLs aren't secure, and shouldn't really be considered so
by aokyler 10y ago
I agree this could become a big issue - but I wouldn't consider it a "security vulnerability" per se.
URLs aren't secure, and shouldn't really be considered so.
- stephenr 10y agoThere is a lot of content from "cloud" apps that has "private link" sharing functionality, where "only someone with this link can view the <object>". No, it really isn't security. But yes, it really does happen, and probably a lot more than you'd think.
- csydas 10y agoI think it's less about the URL itself and more about the services which automatically generate them for content without the user being fully cognizant of what that implies/means. It has the potential to publicize information without the user's intent or knowledge; in the case of OneDrive from the article, it exposed documents with sensitive information when the URL itself wasn't even shared, it was just brute-forced. Prior to Google's changes to the URL shortening, it sounds like it was possible to get quite a bit of personal identifying information just by guessing at the shortened URL, even if the URL itself was never shared. Even if URL shortening is a feature that users are aware exists, the consequences of it certainly aren't immediately clear, and to my knowledge, not many of these services include a way to disable the generation of a shortened link or have a means to prevent this type of scanning from happening.