back to article Swiss banking software has Swiss cheese security, says Rapid7

Rapid7 has gone public with news of an e-commerce SQL injection vulnerability, saying it couldn't raise a response from the vendor. The software in question, SmartVista, is an e-commerce and financial product from BPC Banking, and in this post, Rapid7 says it told the company about the issue back in May 2017. The US CERT …

  1. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge
    FAIL

    Little Bobby Tables strikes again!

  2. Gene Cash Silver badge

    > The US CERT Coordination Centre and SwissCERT joined the security company's effort to alert the Switzerland-based vendor in July and August, ahead of yesterday's disclosure

    Two major government agencies couldn't contact a bank about security... so why do they still have a business licence?

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      Two..agencies couldn't contact a bank about security..why..still have a business licence?

      Because it's not a bank?

      Unlike a real bank, which is basically a large IT operation with a banking license.

      1. MiguelC Silver badge

        Re: Two..agencies couldn't contact a bank about security..why..still have a business licence?

        You've just described modern retail banking.

      2. Dr Who

        Re: Two..agencies couldn't contact a bank about security..why..still have a business licence?

        Exactly. It's not a bank it's a software house.

  3. herman Silver badge

    W0t? The passwords are stored in a plain text database field?

    Bobby Tables will be able to profit nicely.

  4. Mark Simon

    How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

    Bobby Tables notwithstanding, haven’t there been enough high profile incidents to highlight the risk of SQL Injection?

    I don’t know what’s on the back end, but all modern databases support Prepared Statements. Three extra lines of code is all it takes to dramatically reduce the risk.

    Was the developer called Rip Van Winkle?

    1. ratfox Silver badge

      Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

      How is SQL itself still a thing?

      I mean, this is a language that is roughly the equivalent of COBOL. It's been invented almost forty years ago, on the mistaken assumption that programming languages should look like English. Its syntax completely obfuscates the execution logic.

      So now we have computers concatenating strings to build SQL statements, which are sent to other computers, only to be parsed at the other end, which is pretty sad; and when you think of it, that's the only reason SQL injections are even possible in the first place.

      I yearn for a modern language based on the abstract concepts underlying the execution tree. The only way I can explain we don't have such a language is that by the time engineers understand the execution tree, they already have Stockholm syndrome about the syntax.

      1. Bronek Kozicki Silver badge

        Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

        Actually SQL is not that bad and it definitely is not equivalent of COBOL. The problem is not SQL; it is programmers who think that building SQL programmatically by string concatenation is acceptable. It is not and never was. That's what stored procedures with parameters passing are for, or failing that pre-compiled statements, but of course that requires a little more varied code on the caller side. In effect there are two programming models here: 1) actual database queries and manipulation language in SQL and 2) database interface with procedures/pre-compiled statements, parameters etc. required to use 1) from other languages.

        Programmers often perceive 2) as an optional element but it is not and as you have demonstrated above, it is easier to rant about 1) than learn to use it properly.

        FWIW I do not use SQL now and have not used it for years, but frankly how can anyone aspire for "better languages" without understanding of what went before?

        1. Adam 1 Silver badge

          Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

          The problem with stored procedures is that they are vendor specific where as plain 'ol SQL is largely cross RDBMS compatible.

          Sure you can use an ORM wrapper but these come with their own challenges.

          In agree though that if we had a clean slate to redesign SQL, there is no way we would interleave the instruction and data elements or allow inline constant expressions that drive people to try and build up the command with string concatenation.

      2. Lysenko

        Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

        I mean, this is a language that is roughly the equivalent of COBOL. It's been invented almost forty years ago, on the mistaken assumption that programming languages should look like English. Its syntax completely obfuscates the execution logic.

        As usual with knee jerk ageism, you miss the point. The new hotness in web monkey land is GraphQL which makes everything look like JSON, conveys even less about execution strategy than SQL (at least you can infer something from JOIN) and only obstructs nefarious injection by virtue of the fact that no RDBMS understands it natively (yet).

        The problem isn't the query language, it is the vast attack surface you open up when you allow a front end to send commands either directly to an RDBMS or via middleware built by people who only understand ORMs and therefore can't code triggers and stored procedures effectively.

      3. Aodhhan Bronze badge

        Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

        SQL being roughly equivalent to COBOL

        You know...

        If you're not educated on a subject, please don't believe you're obliged to show the world how ignorant you are.

        Your statement displays your closed mindedness towards learning. As if COBOL hasn't been through any changes since 1959.

        I guess you probably believe Microsoft DOS or UNIX hasn't had any changes since 1980.

        Not all is lost though; I do believe the food industry can still use you.

    2. Adam 1 Silver badge

      Re: How is SQL Injection Still a Thing?

      I know right. Anyone would think it is still the undisputed number one vulnerability in the owasp top 10.

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Christoph Silver badge

    "one could craft a series of database queries to ask true/false statements such as 'Does the first character, of the first row, in the user’s column start with a?' "

    Or one could ask: 'Is the first character, of the first row, in the user’s column less than n?' and do a binary chop in far less time.

  7. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    FAIL

    It's 2017 and near unrestricted queries in a specific data type field are still a thing.

    Fail.

    Just fail.

  8. roselan
    Alien

    Smells fishy

    A quick lookup at "bpc banking" shows that it's not a bank but an "IT solution provider" legally liable in the US headed by two Russian guys whose only real client seems to be in Oman.

    I don't say it smells fishy but it smells fishy.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019