Context Request Cookies Add
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Proxysg Log Fields and Substitutions
ProxySG Log Fields and Substitutions Version 6.5.x through 7.3.x Guide Revision: 12/10/2020 Symantec Corporation - SGOS 6.x and 7.x Legal Notice Broadcom, the pulse logo, Connecting everything, and Symantec are among the trademarks of Broadcom. The term “Broadcom” refers to Broadcom Inc. and/or its subsidiaries. Copyright © 2020 Broadcom. All Rights Reserved. The term “Broadcom” refers to Broadcom Inc. and/or its subsidiaries. For more information, please visit www.broadcom.com. Broadcom reserves the right to make changes without further notice to any products or data herein to improve reliability, function, or design. Information furnished by Broadcom is believed to be accurate and reliable. However, Broadcom does not assume any liability arising out of the application or use of this information, nor the application or use of any product or circuit described herein, neither does it convey any license under its patent rights nor the rights of others. Thursday, December 10, 2020 2 of 182 sample-title Table of Contents "About this Document" on the next page Commonly Used Fields: n "Client/Server Bytes" on page 6 n "Connection Details" on page 9 n "DNS" on page 26 n "HTTP" on page 28 n "Request Headers" on page 29 n "Response Headers" on page 63 n "Request/Response Status" on page 102 n "SSL " on page 116 n "Time" on page 123 n "URL" on page 134 n "User Authentication" on page 145 n "WAF" on page 152 Additional Fields: n "CIFS " on page 155 n "MAPI and Office 365" on page 160 n "P2P Connections" on page 163 n "Special Characters" on page 164 n "Streaming Media" on page 167 n "WebEx Proxy" on page 175 "Substitution Modifiers" on page 176 n "Timestamp Modifiers" on page 177 n "String Modifiers " on page 179 n "Host Modifiers" on page 182 3 of 182 Symantec Corporation - SGOS 6.x and 7.x About this Document This document lists all valid ELFF and CPL substitutions for ELFF log formats, and some custom values for custom log formats. -
The Common Gateway Interface and Server-Side Programming
WebWeb MasterMaster 11 IFIIFI Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis Département Informatique [email protected] Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 1 Unit 3 The Common Gateway Interface and Server-side Programming Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 2 Agenda • The Common Gateway Interface • Server-Side Programming Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 3 Introduction • An HTTP server is often used as a gateway to a different information system (legacy or not), for example – an existing body of documents – an existing database application • The Common Gateway Interface (CGI) is an agreement between HTTP server implementors about how to integrate such gateway scripts and programs • It was typically (but not exclusively) used in conjunction with HTML forms to build database applications • Nowadays largely superseded by dynamic Web content technologies such as PHP, ASP.NET, Java Servlets, and Node.js Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 4 The Common Gateway Interface • The Common Gateway Interface (CGI) is a de facto standard protocol for Web servers to execute an external program that generates a Web page dynamically • The external program executes like a console application running on the same machine as the Web server (the host) • Such program is known as a CGI script or simply as a CGI Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 5 How Does That Work? • Each time a client requests the URL corresponding to a CGI program, the server will execute it in real-time – E.g.: GET http://www.example.org/cgi-bin/add?x=2&y=2 • The output of the program will go more or less directly to the client • Strictly speaking, the “input” to the program is the HTTP request • Environment variables are used to pass data about the request from the server to the program – They are accessed by the script in a system-defined manner – Missing environment variable = NULL value – Character encoding is system-defined Andrea G. -
BG95&BG77 HTTP(S) Application Note
BG95&BG77 HTTP(S) Application Note LPWA Module Series Rev. BG95&BG77_HTTP(S)_Application_Note_V1.0 Date: 2019-08-12 Status: Released www.quectel.com LPWA Module Series BG95&BG77 HTTP(S) Application Note Our aim is to provide customers with timely and comprehensive service. For any assistance, please contact our company headquarters: Quectel Wireless Solutions Co., Ltd. Building 5, Shanghai Business Park Phase III (Area B), No.1016 Tianlin Road, Minhang District, Shanghai, China 200233 Tel: +86 21 5108 6236 Email: [email protected] Or our local office. For more information, please visit: http://www.quectel.com/support/sales.htm For technical support, or to report documentation errors, please visit: http://www.quectel.com/support/technical.htm Or email to: [email protected] GENERAL NOTES QUECTEL OFFERS THE INFORMATION AS A SERVICE TO ITS CUSTOMERS. THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS BASED UPON CUSTOMERS’ REQUIREMENTS. QUECTEL MAKES EVERY EFFORT TO ENSURE THE QUALITY OF THE INFORMATION IT MAKES AVAILABLE. QUECTEL DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTY AS TO THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN, AND DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY INJURY, LOSS OR DAMAGE OF ANY KIND INCURRED BY USE OF OR RELIANCE UPON THE INFORMATION. ALL INFORMATION SUPPLIED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE. COPYRIGHT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS PROPRIETARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF QUECTEL WIRELESS SOLUTIONS CO., LTD. TRANSMITTING, REPRODUCTION, DISSEMINATION AND EDITING OF THIS DOCUMENT AS WELL AS UTILIZATION OF THE CONTENT ARE FORBIDDEN WITHOUT PERMISSION. OFFENDERS WILL BE HELD LIABLE FOR PAYMENT OF DAMAGES. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED IN THE EVENT OF A PATENT GRANT OR REGISTRATION OF A UTILITY MODEL OR DESIGN. -
A Few RPO Exploitation Techniques
MBSD Technical Whitepaper A few RPO exploitation techniques Takeshi Terada / Mitsui Bussan Secure Directions, Inc. June 2015 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 2. Path manipulation techniques ............................................................................. 2 2.1. Loading another file on IIS/ASP.NET ......................................................................... 2 2.2. Loading another file on Safari/Firefox ....................................................................... 3 2.3. Loading another file on WebLogic/IE ......................................................................... 4 2.4. Loading file with query string on WebLogic+Apache ................................................ 5 2.5. Attack possibility in other environments ................................................................... 5 3. Forcing IE’s CSS expression via CV .................................................................... 7 4. Non-stylesheet RPO attacks ................................................................................ 9 5. A path handling bug in CakePHP ...................................................................... 11 6. Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 13 7. References........................................................................................................... 14 8. Test environments ............................................................................................. -
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Nottingham Request for Comments: 7320 BCP: 190 July 2014 Updates: 3986 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Nottingham Request for Comments: 7320 BCP: 190 July 2014 Updates: 3986 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: 2070-1721 URI Design and Ownership Abstract Section 1.1.1 of RFC 3986 defines URI syntax as "a federated and extensible naming system wherein each scheme's specification may further restrict the syntax and semantics of identifiers using that scheme." In other words, the structure of a URI is defined by its scheme. While it is common for schemes to further delegate their substructure to the URI's owner, publishing independent standards that mandate particular forms of URI substructure is inappropriate, because that essentially usurps ownership. This document further describes this problematic practice and provides some acceptable alternatives for use in standards. Status of This Memo This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on BCPs is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7320. Nottingham Best Current Practice [Page 1] RFC 7320 URI Design Ownership July 2014 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. -
Character Encoding Issues for Web Passwords
and ÆÆÆ码码码 ,סיסמאות! ˜,Of contrasenas Character encoding issues for web passwords Joseph Bonneau Rubin Xu Computer Laboratory Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge University of Cambridge [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—Password authentication remains ubiquitous on of that wording. This process is prone to failure and usability the web, primarily because of its low cost and compatibility studies suggest that a significant number of users will be un- with any device which allows a user to input text. Yet text is not able to use a password they remember conceptually because universal. Computers must use a character encoding system to convert human-comprehensible writing into bits. We examine they cannot reproduce the precise representation [33]. for the first time the lingering effects of character encoding A further conversion must take place to convert the on the password ecosystem. We report a number of bugs at abstract concept of “text” into a sequence of bits suitable large websites which reveal that non-ASCII passwords are often for computer manipulation. For example, the letter m at the poorly supported, even by websites otherwise correctly sup- beginning of the password above is commonly represented porting the recommended Unicode/UTF-8 character encoding system. We also study user behaviour through several leaked using the eight bits 01101101. This process is known as data sets of passwords chosen by English, Chinese, Hebrew character encoding and, despite decades of work towards and Spanish speakers as case studies. Our findings suggest a universal standard, there remain dozens of schemes in that most users still actively avoid using characters outside of widespread use to map characters into sequences of bits. -
Introduction
HTTP Request Smuggling in 2020 – New Variants, New Defenses and New Challenges Amit Klein SafeBreach Labs Introduction HTTP Request Smuggling (AKA HTTP Desyncing) is an attack technique that exploits different interpretations of a stream of non-standard HTTP requests among various HTTP devices between the client (attacker) and the server (including the server itself). Specifically, the attacker manipulates the way various HTTP devices split the stream into individual HTTP requests. By doing this, the attacker can “smuggle” a malicious HTTP request through an HTTP device to the server abusing the discrepancy in the interpretation of the stream of requests and desyncing between the server’s view of the HTTP request (and response) stream and the intermediary HTTP device’s view of these streams. In this way, for example, the malicious HTTP request can be "smuggled" as a part of the previous HTTP request. HTTP Request Smuggling was invented in 2005, and recently, additional research cropped up. This research field is still not fully explored, especially when considering open source defense systems such as mod_security’s community rule-set (CRS). These HTTP Request Smuggling defenses are rudimentary and not always effective. My Contribution My contribution is three-fold. I explore new attacks and defense mechanisms, and I provide some “challenges”. 1. New attacks: I provide some new HTTP Request Smuggling variants and show how they work against various proxy-server (or proxy-proxy) combinations. I also found a bypass for mod_security CRS (assuming HTTP Request Smuggling is possible without it). An attack demonstration script implementing my payloads is available in SafeBreach Labs’ GitHub repository (https://github.com/SafeBreach-Labs/HRS). -
Get Data from Post Request Node Js
Get Data From Post Request Node Js Sabbathless Parker equalizing his petcocks dry-clean troublously. Ablaze Aubert always journalizes his rattening if Hersh is Swadeshi or retted certifiably. Immethodical Joab imbodies some Poznan and befogged his vermicides so unfashionably! Before executing the database to request data from post request is supposed to The comments should delight you rather the code well var posthandle functionrequest response if requestmethod 'POST' did all. Nodejs Handling POST Requests nodejs Tutorial. In the JS file we'd smile to make a patio we can reference node-fetch. Stringify version of our body can we created earlier in the code headers the header data we attach to sample on simple request Node-Fetch is promise. Contrary until the Nodejs implementation it left not guaranteed that early content and been. Post event Data With Axios Mastering JS. Expressjs Web Application TutorialsTeacher. In order to get data using a traditional react to finish rendering and servers? The Http Client in angularcommonHTTP offers a simplified client HTTP API for. I value a nodejs app where some wanted our unit test some HTTP requests. Email address already takes a get data from server and location of this js application with no new ideas to. Express post request query parameters are evidence by HTTP clients by forms. Find out stern to extract the knowledge sent as JSON through an HTTP request body using Node. How please Use Axios to Make HTTP Requests GET either and. Server from node js and post request gets a tricky question for getting the name is the one. -
API Technical Document
Case API Service Technical Documentation Date: December 19, 2017 Case API Service – Technical Documentation 1 Expected Knowledge .............................................................................................................. 3 2 Getting Started ........................................................................................................................ 3 3 More Technical Information ................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Request reference ............................................................................................................. 3 3.1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 REST style interface ................................................................................................. 3 3.1.3 Requests .................................................................................................................... 4 3.1.4 Authentication ........................................................................................................... 4 3.1.5 Encryption ................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.6 Resources .................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.7 Request Parameters .................................................................................................. -
MCSD Programming in HTML5 with Javascript and CSS3
Microsoft 70-480 MCSD Programming in HTML5 with JavaScript and CSS3 Microsoft 70-480 Dumps Available Here at: https://www.certification-questions.com/microsoft-exam/70-480-dumps.html Enrolling now you will get access to 317 questions in a unique set of 70- 480 dumps Question 1 You are developing a customer contact form that will be displayed on a page of a company's website. The page collects information about the customer. If a customer enters a value before submitting the form, it must be a valid email address. You need to ensure that the data validation requirement is met. What should you use? Options: A. <input name="email" type="url"/> B. <input name="email" type="text" required="required"/> C. <<input name="email" type="text"/> D. <input name="email" type="email"/> Answer: D Explanation: The <input type="email"> is used for input fields that should contain an e-mail address. Depending on browser support, the e-mail address can be automatically validated when submitted. Some smartphones recognize the email type, and adds ".com" to the keyboard to match email input. Example: <form> E-mail: <input type="email" name="email"/> </form> Reference: http://www.w3schools.com/html/html5_form_input_types.asp Question 2 https://www.certification-questions.com Microsoft 70-480 DRAG DROP You are developing a form that captures a user's email address by using HTML5 and jQuery. The form must capture the email address and return it as a query string parameter. The query string parameter must display the @ symbol that is used in the email address. You need to implement this functionality. -
Rcurl: General Network (HTTP/FTP/...) Client Interface for R
Package ‘RCurl’ September 17, 2021 Version 1.98-1.5 Title General Network (HTTP/FTP/...) Client Interface for R SystemRequirements GNU make, libcurl Description A wrapper for 'libcurl' <https://curl.se/libcurl/> Provides functions to allow one to compose general HTTP requests and provides convenient functions to fetch URIs, get & post forms, etc. and process the results returned by the Web server. This provides a great deal of control over the HTTP/FTP/... connection and the form of the request while providing a higher-level interface than is available just using R socket connections. Additionally, the underlying implementation is robust and extensive, supporting FTP/FTPS/TFTP (uploads and downloads), SSL/HTTPS, telnet, dict, ldap, and also supports cookies, redirects, authentication, etc. License BSD_3_clause + file LICENSE Depends R (>= 3.4.0), methods Imports bitops Suggests XML Collate aclassesEnums.R bitClasses.R xbits.R base64.R binary.S classes.S curl.S curlAuthConstants.R curlEnums.R curlError.R curlInfo.S dynamic.R form.S getFormParams.R getURLContent.R header.R http.R httpError.R httpErrors.R iconv.R info.S mime.R multi.S options.S scp.R support.S upload.R urlExists.R zclone.R zzz.R NeedsCompilation yes Author CRAN Team [ctb, cre] (de facto maintainer since 2013), Duncan Temple Lang [aut] (<https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0159-1546>) Maintainer CRAN Team <[email protected]> Repository CRAN Date/Publication 2021-09-17 06:19:14 UTC 1 2 R topics documented: R topics documented: AUTH_ANY . .3 base64 . .3 basicHeaderGatherer . .5 basicTextGatherer . .7 binaryBuffer . 10 CFILE . 11 chunkToLineReader . 12 clone . -
Yarl Documentation Release 1.6.3
yarl Documentation Release 1.6.3- Andrew Svetlov Sep 15, 2021 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 2 Installation 5 3 Dependencies 7 4 API documentation 9 5 Comparison with other URL libraries 11 6 Why isn’t boolean supported by the URL query API? 13 7 Source code 15 8 Discussion list 17 9 Authors and License 19 9.1 Public API................................................ 19 10 Indices and tables 31 Python Module Index 33 Index 35 i ii yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- The module provides handy URL class for URL parsing and changing. CONTENTS 1 yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- 2 CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION URL is constructed from str: >>> from yarl import URL >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org/~guido?arg=1#frag') >>> url URL('https://www.python.org/~guido?arg=1#frag') All URL parts: scheme, user, password, host, port, path, query and fragment are accessible by properties: >>> url.scheme 'https' >>> url.host 'www.python.org' >>> url.path '/~guido' >>> url.query_string 'arg=1' >>> url.query <MultiDictProxy('arg': '1')> >>> url.fragment 'frag' All URL manipulations produces a new URL object: >>> url.parent/ 'downloads/source' URL('https://www.python.org/downloads/source') A URL object can be modified with / and % operators: >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org') >>> url/ 'foo' / 'bar' URL('https://www.python.org/foo/bar') >>> url/ 'foo' %{ 'bar': 'baz'} URL('https://www.python.org/foo?bar=baz') Strings passed to constructor and modification methods are automatically encoded giving canonical representation as result: >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org/') >>> url URL('https://www.python.org/%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D1%8C') 3 yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- Regular properties are percent-decoded, use raw_ versions for getting encoded strings: >>> url.path '/' >>> url.raw_path '/%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D1%8C' Human readable representation of URL is available as human_repr(): >>> url.human_repr() 'https://www.python.org/' For full documentation please read Public API section.