## How I Use Firefox as a Web App Pentesting Browser

April 3rd, 2016 by Patrick Thomas

I’m spending more of my time these days helping other people be effective at security testing applications, and as part of that I’m a huge fan of “over the shoulder” mentoring. Some of the most useful things that I’ve learned from others are not things they thought to mention, but rather those moments of “hey, back up a second — what was that thing you just did?“. Sometimes it’s commands or small utility tools, shortcut keys or capabilities of a program I didn’t know about, or just some quick and dirty technique that someone uses all the time but doesn’t think is special enough to talk about.

To that end, here’s a quick walkthrough of the broad strokes of how I set up Firefox for use in testing. My preferred testing setup is Firefox through Burp: the simplest setup is going to be useful, but there are a lot of small configuration details that can help a stock Firefox become even more of a pentesting asset.

## Use Profiles

To test authentication and authorization issues you’re really going to need two browsers open at the same time, in different principal contexts (such “User”/”Admin”, “Tenant1″/”Tenant2″, and the ever populated “Unauthenticated”). Then, when you notice something that might have horizontal or vertical privilege issues, you can simple paste the request into the other browser, or swap cookies between your two active browsers. I prefer to run both through the same Burp instance so that I can easily diff or replay between equivalent requests/responses for different principals.

That’s where profiles come in. Normally when you launch Firefox it’ll give you multiple windows that share a common profile; however, if you launch with special command line flags, you can run two completely separate profiles at the same time. To create and manage profiles, launch Firefox Profile manager by adding the Profile Manager flag:

firefox -no-remote -ProfileManager

After creating different profiles, you can create shortcuts to launch them directly, eg:

"C:\path\to\firefox.exe" -no-remote -profile "C:\path\to\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\Assess1"
"C:\path\to\firefox.exe" -no-remote -profile "C:\path\to\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\Assess2"

To keep track of which is which, both visually and in Burp, I add a contrasting color themes (such as blue and red) and use a plugin to ensure that each sends an identifying header (see plugins section).

As a sidenote to auth testing, I’m really excited about the AuthMatrix Burp Plugin. I haven’t gotten to properly put it through its paces yet, but more info to come when I have an informed opinion.

## Plugins

Firefox Add-On collection that includes a lot of tools mentioned below and that you may find useful during a penetration test.

Some specific plugins you’ll definitely want:

And a couple other pieces of functionality which can be filled by various plugins:

• Manage proxy settings:
• FoxyProxy
• ProxySelector
• Change User Agents
• UserAgentSwitcher
• Simplify JS and JSON
• JSONView
• Javascript Deminifier
• Passively detect remote technologies:
• Wappalyzer
• Fetch lots of content at once:
• DownThemAll!
• Interact with REST services:
• RESTClient (although Chrome’s Postman is better, SoapUI is quite serviceable, and Burp will also work)

For Foxyproxy, I like to just blacklist a bunch of domains right in the browser so that they’ll never get passed to the proxy. This keeps the Burp request history cleaner and means I don’t have to make too many assumptions in Burp about what hosts an application will talk to (It also means you won’t have to reconfigure Firefox for each engagement to keep it clean). If the browser is too chatty through Burp you risk losing some valuable information when you rely on “Show only in-scope items”.

When advertising and tracking domains are out of scope, you can also load large lists of advertisers and blacklist those from your proxy to keep the burp state even trimmer.

I use the ModifyHeaders plugin to send a unique header from each browser profile (eg, “BrowserProfile: AssessRed”). This helps me keep track in Burp during my testing, and it can also seriously help with potential client issues when they can easily identify and (hopefully) rule out your traffic as a potential cause of a problem.

## Disable Chatty Features

Speaking of chatty features, you’ll probably want to disable a bunch of automatic/implicit traffic that could bloat your Burp state or create red herrings in testing: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-stop-firefox-making-automatic-connections

You’ll also want to tweak some settings in about:config to prevent both chatty traffic and sending potentially sensitive client URLs to public antimalware lists:

 browser.safebrowsing.enabled -> false browser.safebrowsing.malware.enabled -> false

## A Few Words on Chrome

You can do a lot of this with Chrome. It supports profiles, has many approximately equivalent plugins, and can be configured to not use the system proxy by installing proxy manager plugins. That said, it feels like you have to work harder to make Chrome play nice in a pentesting environment. YMMV.

## Burp Testing Profile

Although it’s not related to Firefox, one thing that I notice biting a lot of people is that they don’t load a consistent profile. Every single new test I do starts with a standard, clean burp state file with all of my preferences loaded in it. I just copy “InitialEngagementBurpState.burp” into my notes directory, load it in, and know that I’m getting all my standard preferences such as autosave (every hour (!) and into a directory that I can regularly clean up), logging, plugin config, etc. I’ve seen colleagues forget this on back to back tests and lose their first day of testing each time because they didn’t manually enable the autosave and hit a crash.

What did I miss? Some favorite plugin, or special approach? What’s unique about your own setup that you take some pride in?

## Trivial Passwords Are Worse Than Useless: A Simple Case Study in Entropy

April 7th, 2011 by Patrick Thomas

Apparently an email address I own is similar enough to an Indian surname that I get a fair amount of misdirected business correspondence. Despite protestations that they have the wrong address, one large financial institution however continues to send me account updates (including account numbers, balances and addresses). The documents are sent as password protected PDFs, which might be fine, except that they state in the text of the email that the password is the user’s date of birth in the format DDMMYYYY.

### Complexity Fail

Those of you passingly familiar with the concept of entropy no doubt let out a groan there. For the rest, here’s why: using a date of birth reduces the complexity of the password into the realm of “trivially weak”. Entropy is a common measurement of information complexity; how “surprising” a piece of information is, or how “unknown” it is (…stick with me on this). Simply knowing that the password is a date reduces the unknown-ness of that password from a reasonably-secure level to an entirely unacceptable level.

For comparison, if we assume an 8-character password with the 94 standard keyboard symbols, we have an entropy of (8 log2(94) ) = 52.44 bits (or equivalently, just over 6 quadrillion possibilities), which is reasonable for most purposes.

On the other hand, a date isn’t just an 8 character password. It’s not even an 8 character numeric password (with obviously 99,999,999 options, or 26.8 bits of entropy), which would be weak but not laughable. In fact, it’s really a 3 character password: a month, a day, and a year. Those are respectively ~30.44 possibilities  (days per month), 12 possibilities, and 60 possibilities (assuming our account holder was born between 1940 and 2000). In bits, that’s approximate 4.93 + 3.58 + 5.91 = 14.42 bits. An analogous password described in characters we are familiar with would be a three character password made up of: a single number, followed by a single lower-case letter, followed by a single alphanumeric. So, your password options are no different (entropy-wise) than “1aA” or “8q3″, and you didn’t even get to pick your wussy three characters.

### Solving 14 bits of Entropy

Let’s put this to work. First, a list of every date between Jan 1, 1940 and Jan 1, 2000. Python is my sketchpad of choice:

from datetime import datetime, timedelta   max_date = datetime(1999, 01, 01) date = datetime(1940, 01, 01) day = timedelta(1) f = open("datelist.txt", "w")   while(date < max_date):     f.write(date.strftime("%d%m%Y")+"\n")     date = date + day   f.close()

Now datelist has a properly formatted date for each day in our range. How many possibilities is that?

$head -n 2 datelist.txt 01011940 02011940 03011940$ wc -l datelist.txt 21550 datelist.txt

That’s in line with our estimate above. Cool, let’s use that list to break a PDF created with this password scheme. Pdfcrack is a simple open-source password bruteforcing tool that helpfully takes a wordlist.

$pdfcrack -f SensitiveDoc.pdf -w datelist.txt PDF version 1.4 Security Handler: Standard V: 2 R: 3 P: -1028 Length: 128 Encrypted Metadata: True FileID: 9f86e55a12672dcd9b9a9cd3423303da U: b89fd170770d5b802423d0ec2ae7ec6d00000000000000000000000000000000 O: 301981f88c00ebdafde32360d24b7ae0f6b8a3e1865ac314cbaec4f7cc7a3f49 found user-password: '13051959' How long did that take? $ /usr/bin/time -p pdfcrack -f SensitiveDoc.pdf -w datelist.txt cmd 2>&1 | grep user found user-password: '13051959' user 0.20

One fifth of a second. Super secure!

So, to wrap up. Less complex passwords are reasonable in a security context where a system can monitor password guessing: web based systems, network logins, etc. Then you can respond with enforced guessing intervals, CAPTCHAs or secondary validation. However, when the attacker can take the data for offline cracking, the required strength of passwords goes way up. Using and trusting weak passwords in this instance caused this company to broadcast sensitive information that it wouldn’t intentionally expose.

The company would be much better off providing users a random 10 character code that they can write down and use to decrypt the account statements (yes, seriously, write down your passwords), or simply asking users to log in for the statement information.

## Charlie Brown’s Nightmare Before Christmas

January 26th, 2011 by Patrick Thomas

I always enjoy reading the Christmas Challenges created by Ed Skoudis and Yori Kvitchko over at ethicalhacker.net. This year’s puzzle was “The Nightmare Before Charlie Brown’s Christmas” and offered a chance to play around with VoIP, which I don’t get to do much of normally.

The winners were just posted, and my entry got the nod for Best Creative Entry. This is particularly awesome for me since the original Counter Hack (by Skoudis) was one of the first security books I ever bought.

I highly recommend reading through the contest and the answers; as always, the technical walkthrough is hugely informative, and they cover a massive toychest of wicked VoIP hacking utilities. There’s also some pretty nice command line kung foo (hat tip) that makes me remember the power of the Unix philosophy of small tools.