COSI-Lab / go-talks

Just another talks rewrite
MIT License
2 stars 2 forks source link

Potential clickjacking exploit #2

Open Alextopher opened 1 year ago

Alextopher commented 1 year ago

This has been detected by an automated scan. It's not clear if we are vulnerable to this exploit, but fixing the issue anyway could clear up the scans.

The remote web server does not set an X-Frame-Options response header or a Content-Security-Policy 'frame-ancestors' response header in all content responses. This could potentially expose the site to a clickjacking or UI redress attack, in which an attacker can trick a user into clicking an area of the vulnerable page that is different than what the user perceives the page to be. This can result in a user performing fraudulent or malicious transactions.

X-Frame-Options has been proposed by Microsoft as a way to mitigate clickjacking attacks and is currently supported by all major browser vendors.

Content-Security-Policy (CSP) has been proposed by the W3C Web Application Security Working Group, with increasing support among all major browser vendors, as a way to mitigate clickjacking and other attacks. The 'frame-ancestors' policy directive restricts which sources can embed the protected resource.

Note that while the X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy response headers are not the only mitigations for clickjacking, they are currently the most reliable methods that can be detected through automation. Therefore, this plugin may produce false positives if other mitigation strategies (e.g., frame-busting JavaScript) are deployed or if the page does not perform any security-sensitive transactions.