Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?)
From: Jan Muenther <jan.muenther () nruns com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:23:35 +0100
Hello,
just to quickly sum things up: Using stored procedures does not protect you from SQL injection - you may decrease the amount of points where things can be altered, but that's about it. In general, you end up with a faster SQL injection :P What you want to use a parameterized prepared statements, which take over the task of escaping special characters for you, so e.g. the single tick does not get processed as an active component of the SQL statement.Do STORED PROCEDURES really protect against any kind of SQL Injection? I have read many articles about, some say they are and some say they are NOT! Isn't there any way to do code injection into a SP or are they fully-secure against Injections?
As a general rule - if you find yourself concatenating strings containing user input to create your SQL query, you're doing something substantially wrong. I'd still advise you to filter input generically using a whitelist (blacklisting is fairly dangerous with databases, see e.g. the CHAR(0xXX) thingy), and also to use stored procedures, simply since it's best practice and may help to prevent clusterf**cks deriving from combinations of smaller issues.
Hope that helps, Cheers, j. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Sen, Adem (Jan 02)
- Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Devdas Bhagat (Jan 02)
- Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Vulnerability Management (Jan 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Sen, Adem (Jan 02)
- Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) James Tucker (Jan 02)
- Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Jan Muenther (Jan 03)
- Re: Antitoxin for "SQL Injection" (?) Marco Ermini (Jan 03)