[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53ABD0DD.8060801@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 09:50:53 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: Question regarding CVE applicability of missing
HttpOnly flag
On 06/26/2014 01:07 AM, cve-assign@...re.org wrote:
> -- compared to the development cost in arranging for the flag to be
> set, is it possible that the real-life benefit is too small?
You need a separate vulnerability to access the cookie. These
vulnerabilities will have to be addressed even if the HttpOnly flag is
set because indirectly, they usually give attackers access to
information from which cookies are derived (e.g., by injecting a
malicious login form). Therefore, I think the HttpOnly flag is just
hardening, and it's not even a very effective form of it.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
