3 ms·

My apologies, I was using a client which kept the connection alive between the 0D0A and 0A requests, which has an effect on www.pinterest.com. Rerunning the tes

My apologies, I was using a client which kept the connection alive between the 0D0A and 0A requests, which has an effect on www.pinterest.com. Rerunning the test with separate connections for 0D0A and 0A requests, www.pinterest.com and phys.org are no longer affected (I've removed the two from the list), but all other URLs are still affected.

tptacek 2y ago
I picked one at random --- hhs.gov --- and it too appears to work? For what it's worth: I'm testing by piping the bytes for a bare-newline HTTP request directly into netcat.
- LegionMammal978 2y ago
  Make sure you're contacting hhs.gov and not www.hhs.gov, the www. subdomain reacts differently. $ printf 'GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: hhs.gov\r\n\r\n' | nc hhs.gov 80 HTTP/1.1 302 Found Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 01:38:29 GMT Server: Apache Location: http://www.hhs.gov/web/508// Content-Length: 212 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>302 Found</title> </head><body> <h1>Found</h1> <p>The document has moved <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/web/508//">here</a>.</p> </body></html> ^C $ printf 'GET / HTTP/1.1\nHost: hhs.gov\n\n' | nc hhs.gov 80 HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 01:38:40 GMT Server: Apache Content-Length: 226 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>400 Bad Request</title> </head><body> <h1>Bad Request</h1> <p>Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.<br /> </p> </body></html>
  - tptacek 2y ago
    Ahh, that was it, thanks.
    - shadowgovt 2y ago
      And this whole exercise is an example of why this is a non-starter proposal (at least the "change existing implementations" part). How much do we expect the domain owners to invest in changing an implementation that already works? Hint: it's a number smaller than epsilon. Google might, but their volume is so high they care about the cost of individual bytes on the wire.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        This exercise was about demonstrating that our security can't rely on making sure there's a carriage return in HTTP line termination, because there is no such norm. See the root of the thread, where I asked the question.
        shadowgovt 2y ago
        Oh, I agree it's about that too, but my point is you've already volunteered more time and resources investigating the situation than most companies would be willing to spend.

tptacek 2y ago

I picked one at random --- hhs.gov --- and it too appears to work? For what it's worth: I'm testing by piping the bytes for a bare-newline HTTP request directly into netcat.

LegionMammal978 2y ago
Make sure you're contacting hhs.gov and not www.hhs.gov, the www. subdomain reacts differently. $ printf 'GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: hhs.gov\r\n\r\n' | nc hhs.gov 80 HTTP/1.1 302 Found Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 01:38:29 GMT Server: Apache Location: http://www.hhs.gov/web/508// Content-Length: 212 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>302 Found</title> </head><body> <h1>Found</h1> <p>The document has moved <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/web/508//">here</a>.</p> </body></html> ^C $ printf 'GET / HTTP/1.1\nHost: hhs.gov\n\n' | nc hhs.gov 80 HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 01:38:40 GMT Server: Apache Content-Length: 226 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>400 Bad Request</title> </head><body> <h1>Bad Request</h1> <p>Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.<br /> </p> </body></html>
- tptacek 2y ago
  Ahh, that was it, thanks.
  - shadowgovt 2y ago
    And this whole exercise is an example of why this is a non-starter proposal (at least the "change existing implementations" part). How much do we expect the domain owners to invest in changing an implementation that already works? Hint: it's a number smaller than epsilon. Google might, but their volume is so high they care about the cost of individual bytes on the wire.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      This exercise was about demonstrating that our security can't rely on making sure there's a carriage return in HTTP line termination, because there is no such norm. See the root of the thread, where I asked the question.
      - shadowgovt 2y ago
        Oh, I agree it's about that too, but my point is you've already volunteered more time and resources investigating the situation than most companies would be willing to spend.