Live data from Hacker News

TXT Record XSS

who.is

101–110 of 236 posts

Re: TXT Record XSS

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point--who.is won't play music by itself. Its lookup of the DNS records of jaimehawkins.co.uk injected the music into the page.

Yeah... that was actually hugely annoying. A little warning maybe.

Here's your warning: if you ever click on an HN link titled " XSS", prepare for something annoying to happen.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#102
post #35

Wish there was a warning, because I accidentally clicked this link in class just now.

I wish browser developers gave a shit about their users instead of continuously inventing new ways for sites to auto play annoying content, but such is life.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#103
Come on people, this is so basic. If you didn't generate the data, don't display it on your web page without filtering it. It blows my mind that this isn't just everyone's default.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#104
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know anyone there or anything about the process of getting something hosted there? I can burn the data to a DVD and snail mail it to them (or even drop it off in SF).

https://archive.org/create/ Only takes 5 minutes to create an account.

I've made an account, and will upload tomorrow. My home internet connection has a pretty slow upload so I'm going to sneakernet it to work and upload from there.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#105
post #57

I am half serious, but how about making HTML served in TXT records a standard trick for serving small web pages very quickly? There are way fewer network round trips: 1. DNS query for TXT record for example.com 2. DNS reply with HTML content Compared with the traditional 7 steps: 1. DNS query for A record for example.com 2. DNS reply with x.x.x.x 3. TCP SYN to port 80 4. TCP SYN/ACK 5. TCP ACK 6. HTTP GET 7. HTTP rep…

Use the Kitchen Sink[1] record type. It's more appropriated than TXT. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsind-kitchen-sink-0...

Not even an April fools' RFC. Wow.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#106
post #57

I am half serious, but how about making HTML served in TXT records a standard trick for serving small web pages very quickly? There are way fewer network round trips: 1. DNS query for TXT record for example.com 2. DNS reply with HTML content Compared with the traditional 7 steps: 1. DNS query for A record for example.com 2. DNS reply with x.x.x.x 3. TCP SYN to port 80 4. TCP SYN/ACK 5. TCP ACK 6. HTTP GET 7. HTTP rep…

Meh, interesting thought, but a few things come to mind: - It could take multiple days to update the website for the entire world - It would be very easy to spoof the entire site - It would probably slow down the rest of the queries the DNS server would be responding to at the time. Also, updating DNS can be a pain for sites that aren't managing their own records.

Used to work in the DNS business. "It will take up to 24 hours to propagate" is a way to manage expectations and prevent support calls from coming in within the first 24 hours after a DNS change, not a reflection of actual DNS propagation times.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#107
post #99
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, Chrome tells you which tab audio is playing from, it's nice.

I think Chrome is able to do this because it separates tabs into processes, but I don't think there's a good way for Firefox to do it since everything is in a single process. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=486262

I don't think this has to do with multiprocess. The instance of HTML engine (geckk?) just needs to track who used the audio API.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Never trust user input. Never trust any input. I think this is a case where people assume that is isn't pure user input because is would have already been parsed/checked/verified. "Oh, its in the DNS system so it must be safe" is worse then "well, it came from our database so it should be fine". Don't even trust something coming out of your own database. You never know what various input checking bugs might have ac…

Thinking about it as "don't concatenate different data types" leads to even more correct software. Concepts like "trust" and "sanitization" are too often vague and misleading. It might be perfectly valid for TXT records--even trusted and sanitized ones--to contain sequences with left angle brackets that make them look like HTML tags. Either way, that's no excuse for failing to convert the text to HTML (by escaping it…

This is what I always try to press home to developers I work with. It's not 'sanitization', it's encoding. In order to make a web browser display the string I've retrieved from my database, I have to turn it into an HTML representation that will be displayed as that string. In order to use a string in a JavaScript string literal, I need to turn it into a JavaScript string literal which represents the string.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#109
post #100
post #57

I am half serious, but how about making HTML served in TXT records a standard trick for serving small web pages very quickly? There are way fewer network round trips: 1. DNS query for TXT record for example.com 2. DNS reply with HTML content Compared with the traditional 7 steps: 1. DNS query for A record for example.com 2. DNS reply with x.x.x.x 3. TCP SYN to port 80 4. TCP SYN/ACK 5. TCP ACK 6. HTTP GET 7. HTTP rep…

"Again, I am only half serious" (said two times...) Why say that at all? Is it a way to fend off ridicule? Or does this show a lack of confidence in the idea and what you are saying? Reminds me of comments that start "Am I the only one who thinks that..." I've gotten out of the habit of apologizing for things that I say or prefacing them with phrases such as that. The reason is that I found that it was a lazy way to…

As someone who prefaces comments with similar things, I don't think it's unreasonable. Sometimes we know ideas are a bit of a cludge (Thinking back to the first time I did an IP over DNS tunnel) but it's still fun and interesting; but that doesn't stop some people jumping down your throat if they think you're suggesting it in earnest. Twice, maybe much? But the sentiment itself, I can see where it's coming from.

Re: TXT Record XSS

#110

This is hilariousy, but could this potentially be a real threat to anything ?

idk why youre getting downvoted because it's a good question and people need to ask more security questions. Any website I can inject malicious javascript into, I can steal your cookies from (assuming the httponly flag isn't set on the cookie). If you were logged into one of these whois sites and they didnt have the httponly flag set on your auth cookie, an attacker could send you to a page on the site that contains…

Another attack is to rewrite the webpage to show the official login screen for that site, and record their password when they enter it.
Post reply on HN