Skip to content
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

OWASP Benchmark Project #13298

Open
andresriancho opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 9 comments
Open

OWASP Benchmark Project #13298

andresriancho opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 9 comments

Comments

@andresriancho
Copy link
Owner

Scan OWASP Benchmark Project using w3af, find false positives and negatives, improve.

@Sergy123
Copy link

Hi. I'm trying to scan remote OWASP Benchmark with w3af (ubuntu 14.04). It looks like it doesn't find any actual vulnerability so far except "blank http response body" and "DAV incorrect configuration". Could you give me any suggestions how to scan it properly?

@andresriancho
Copy link
Owner Author

I haven't tried scanning it myself. Could you please add these to the ticket?

  • Scan configuration
  • Scan log with debugging information

@Sergy123
Copy link

Sergy123 commented Dec 27, 2017

Scan configuration:
-VMWare Workstation 12 player(Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, RAM 4 GB, 2 Cores)
-VMWare Workstation 12 player(Remote Owasp Benchmark, RAM 4 GB, 2 Cores)
It was not easy to install all dependencies and there is no clear instructions on the web either, but it seems to be working.

Scanner itself is extremely slow comparing to Zap, Arachni and Skip Fish.
And again, could you please produce step by step instructions on how to install the W3AF on Ubuntu or Kali? (whatever version you prefer)
Please see attached scan report.
Owasp .log

@andresriancho
Copy link
Owner Author

andresriancho commented Jan 3, 2018

Running my own OWASP benchmark using:

docker run -i -p 8443:8443 owasp/benchmark

Using latest w3af from develop to scan the target using this script which scans for blind SQL injection only in a subset of the tests:

plugins
output console,text_file
output config text_file
set output_file output-w3af.txt
set verbose True
back
output config console
set verbose False
back

audit sqli, blind_sqli

crawl web_spider
crawl config web_spider
set follow_regex .*/benchmark/sqli-00/.*
back
back

target
set target https://localhost:8443/benchmark/sqli-Index.html
back

start

exit

And got at least two findings before I stopped the scan:

Blind SQL injection was found at: "https://localhost:8443/benchmark/sqli-00/BenchmarkTest00025", using HTTP method POST. The injectable parameter is: "BenchmarkTest00025". This vulnerability was found in the requests with ids 1351 and 1378.

Blind SQL injection was found at: "https://localhost:8443/benchmark/sqli-00/BenchmarkTest00431", using HTTP method POST. The injectable parameter is: "BenchmarkTest00431". This vulnerability was found in the requests with ids 7084 and 7115.

Something I noticed in this benchmark application is that they mix SQL injection tests with crawling / JS parsing, for example in order to detect this vulnerability the scanner needs to have a JS engine:

https://localhost:8443/benchmark/sqli-00/BenchmarkTest00342.html?BenchmarkTest00342=SafeText

Since w3af doesn't have that, it will fail to find the SQL injection.

@Sergy123
Copy link

Sergy123 commented Jan 3, 2018 via email

@andresriancho
Copy link
Owner Author

Lets start from something that we both know works: Does the scan I run work for you?

@Sergy123
Copy link

Sergy123 commented Jan 3, 2018 via email

@andresriancho
Copy link
Owner Author

Those are not vulnerabilities, they are errors.

@Sergy123
Copy link

Sergy123 commented Jan 3, 2018 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants