<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection</title>
	<atom:link href="http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection</link>
	<description>A .NET developer in silicon valley</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 15:31:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daily Links for Friday, June 19th, 2009</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-19463</link>
		<dc:creator>Daily Links for Friday, June 19th, 2009</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:47:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-19463</guid>
		<description>[...] 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection » DamienG [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection » DamienG [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Podcast #58 - Blog - Stack Overflow</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-19382</link>
		<dc:creator>Podcast #58 - Blog - Stack Overflow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:20:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-19382</guid>
		<description>[...] right about something. Don&#8217;t HTML encode data that&#8217;s stored in your database! Take the good advice of Damien Guard and Joel Spolsky! You can choose to store both representations, but don&#8217;t store just the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] right about something. Don&#8217;t HTML encode data that&#8217;s stored in your database! Take the good advice of Damien Guard and Joel Spolsky! You can choose to store both representations, but don&#8217;t store just the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amit</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-11169</link>
		<dc:creator>Amit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 03:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-11169</guid>
		<description>Damien,
When you say &quot;You would imagine the high-level WebForms controls would take care of encoding and you&#039;d be wrong.&quot;. Is there a list of controls that are vulnerable and a list of controls that are not?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Damien,<br />
When you say &#8220;You would imagine the high-level WebForms controls would take care of encoding and you&#8217;d be wrong.&#8221;. Is there a list of controls that are vulnerable and a list of controls that are not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fady Anwar</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5653</link>
		<dc:creator>Fady Anwar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:57:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5653</guid>
		<description>great article, i like the ideas in it
a kick from me ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great article, i like the ideas in it<br />
a kick from me ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How dangerous is HTML injection? &#187; DamienG</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5648</link>
		<dc:creator>How dangerous is HTML injection? &#187; DamienG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:46:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5648</guid>
		<description>[...] For more ASP.NET examples check out 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] For more ASP.NET examples check out 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damien Guard</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5647</link>
		<dc:creator>Damien Guard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:41:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5647</guid>
		<description>It should be encoded regardless of where it came from or whether it is believed to be safe. The only exception is data you expect to contain HTML and are going to sanitize to ensure only has the HTML you like.

One example I&#039;ve seen is blogging software that fails to encode blog post titles because they are &#039;safe&#039; in that they are only entered by the blogging author.

You create a blog post called &quot;Using List&lt;T&gt; for collections&quot; and it shows up with &quot;Using List for collections&quot;, causes the page to fail validation and breaks the RSS feed.

[)amien</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It should be encoded regardless of where it came from or whether it is believed to be safe. The only exception is data you expect to contain HTML and are going to sanitize to ensure only has the HTML you like.</p>
<p>One example I&#8217;ve seen is blogging software that fails to encode blog post titles because they are &#8216;safe&#8217; in that they are only entered by the blogging author.</p>
<p>You create a blog post called &#8220;Using List&lt;T&gt; for collections&#8221; and it shows up with &#8220;Using List for collections&#8221;, causes the page to fail validation and breaks the RSS feed.</p>
<p>[)amien</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Curran</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5644</link>
		<dc:creator>James Curran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5644</guid>
		<description>But that&#039;s not really 5 signs --- It&#039;s really just one sign --- because , Response.Write, HtmlAnchor et al aren&#039;t the problem.  The problem is post.Author.  If it comes from a trusted source (i.e., you typed it in yourself), it&#039;s save to output directly.  If it comes from anywhere else (notably user input), then it must be encoded.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But that&#8217;s not really 5 signs &#8212; It&#8217;s really just one sign &#8212; because , Response.Write, HtmlAnchor et al aren&#8217;t the problem.  The problem is post.Author.  If it comes from a trusted source (i.e., you typed it in yourself), it&#8217;s save to output directly.  If it comes from anywhere else (notably user input), then it must be encoded.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Our daily link (2007-12-18) - Trumpi&#39;s blog</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5640</link>
		<dc:creator>Our daily link (2007-12-18) - Trumpi&#39;s blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:24:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5640</guid>
		<description>[...] 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection - which means that you may be vulnerable to XSS attacks too. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 5 signs your ASP.NET application may be vulnerable to HTML injection &#8211; which means that you may be vulnerable to XSS attacks too. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damien Guard</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5638</link>
		<dc:creator>Damien Guard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:51:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5638</guid>
		<description>Lol, I think that WordPress is determining that might be dangerous. Dave was, I think, mentioning the &lt;page validateRequest=&quot;true&quot; /&gt; option in web.config that tries to prevent your application accepting script from the user.

This is all well and good but if there are other ways to get data into your database (links with other company systems, web services, message pumps or even internal WinForms apps) then those too can be avenues for attack.

Many attacks happen from the inside and anyone with access to the SQL box or a WinForms app could be the one putting the payload there ready for your application to deliver up to unsuspecting users.

[)amien</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lol, I think that WordPress is determining that might be dangerous. Dave was, I think, mentioning the &lt;page validateRequest=&#8221;true&#8221; /&gt; option in web.config that tries to prevent your application accepting script from the user.</p>
<p>This is all well and good but if there are other ways to get data into your database (links with other company systems, web services, message pumps or even internal WinForms apps) then those too can be avenues for attack.</p>
<p>Many attacks happen from the inside and anyone with access to the SQL box or a WinForms app could be the one putting the payload there ready for your application to deliver up to unsuspecting users.</p>
<p>[)amien</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5637</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/2007/12/18/5-signs-your-aspnet-application-may-be-vulnerable-to-html-injection#comment-5637</guid>
		<description>So...

By saying ASP.NET does nothing for you, are you implying that putting a &quot;&quot; section  into your web.config isn&#039;t working anymore for some reason?
It certainly isn&#039;t fool-proof, but it gives a huge head-start getting around the issues you are describing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So&#8230;</p>
<p>By saying ASP.NET does nothing for you, are you implying that putting a &#8220;&#8221; section  into your web.config isn&#8217;t working anymore for some reason?<br />
It certainly isn&#8217;t fool-proof, but it gives a huge head-start getting around the issues you are describing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

