Updated examplereport.xml so it’s valid again

This commit is contained in:
skyanth 2017-06-12 15:55:15 +02:00
parent 6ffdf28be0
commit 1918cdfac5

View File

@ -1,10 +1,24 @@
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><pentest_report xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" findingCode="SID" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../dtd/pentestreport.xsd">
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<pentest_report xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" findingCode="SID"
xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../dtd/pentestreport.xsd">
<meta>
<title>Penetration Test Report</title>
<xi:include href="client_info.xml"/>
<targets>
<target>fishinabarrel.sittingduck.com</target>
</targets>
<activityinfo>
<duration>4</duration>
<persondays>4</persondays>
<test_planning>bla</test_planning>
<report_due>bla</report_due>
<nature>something</nature>
<type>black-box</type>
</activityinfo>
<permission_parties>
<xi:include href="client_info.xml"/>
</permission_parties>
<collaborators>
<reviewers>
<reviewer>Melanie Rieback</reviewer>
@ -68,48 +82,50 @@ who is also the co-founder/CEO of Radically Open Security.</bio>
</version_history>
<xi:include href="snippets/company_info.xml"/>
</meta>
<generate_index/>
<section id="executiveSummary">
<title>Executive Summary</title>
<section id="introduction">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Sitting Duck B.V. (“Sitting Duck”) has assigned
the task of performing a Penetration Test of the FishInABarrel Web
Application to Radically Open Security BV (hereafter “ROS”).
Sitting Duck has made this request to better evaluate the security of the application and
to identify application level vulnerabilities in order to see whether the FishInABarrel
Web Application is ready, security-wise, for production deployment.</p>
<p>This report contains our findings as well as detailed explanations of exactly how ROS performed
the penetration test.</p>
<p>Sitting Duck B.V. (“Sitting Duck”) has assigned the task of performing a
Penetration Test of the FishInABarrel Web Application to Radically
Open Security BV (hereafter “ROS”). Sitting Duck has made this
request to better evaluate the security of the application and to
identify application level vulnerabilities in order to see whether
the FishInABarrel Web Application is ready, security-wise, for
production deployment.</p>
<p>This report contains our findings as well as detailed explanations of
exactly how ROS performed the penetration test.</p>
</section>
<section id="scope">
<title>Scope of work</title>
<p>The scope of the Sitting Duck penetration test was limited to the following
target:</p>
<p>The scope of the Sitting Duck penetration test was limited to the
following target:</p>
<generate_targets/>
<p>The penetration test was carried out from a black box perspective: no information
regarding the system(s) tested was provided by Sitting Duck or FishInABarrel, although FishInABarrel
did provide ROS with two test user accounts.</p>
<p>The penetration test was carried out from a black box perspective: no
information regarding the system(s) tested was provided by Sitting
Duck or FishInABarrel, although FishInABarrel did provide ROS with
two test user accounts.</p>
</section>
<section id="objectives">
<title>Project objectives</title>
<p>The objective of the security assessment is to gain insight into the security of
the host and the FishInABarrel Web Application.</p>
<p>The objective of the security assessment is to gain insight into the
security of the host and the FishInABarrel Web Application.</p>
</section>
<section id="timeline">
<title>Timeline</title>
<p>The FishInABarrel Security Audit took place between January 14 and January 16,
2015.</p>
<p>The FishInABarrel Security Audit took place between January 14 and
January 16, 2015.</p>
</section>
<section id="results">
<title>Results in a Nutshell</title>
<p>During this pentest, we found quite a number of different security problems
Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities, both stored and reflected, Cross-site
Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities,
information disclosures (multiple instances), and lack of
brute force protection.</p>
<p>During this pentest, we found quite a number of different security
problems Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities, both stored
and reflected, Cross-site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities,
information disclosures (multiple instances), and lack of brute
force protection.</p>
</section>
<section id="findingSummary">
<title>Summary of Findings</title>
@ -125,47 +141,59 @@ who is also the co-founder/CEO of Radically Open Security.</bio>
<title>Charts</title>
<section id="threatlevelpie">
<title>Findings by Threat Level</title>
<generate_piechart pieAttr="threatLevel" pieElem="finding" pieHeight="200"/>
<generate_piechart pieAttr="threatLevel" pieElem="finding"
pieHeight="200"/>
</section>
<section id="typepie">
<title>Findings by Type</title>
<generate_piechart pieAttr="type" pieElem="finding" pieHeight="200"/>
<generate_piechart pieAttr="type" pieElem="finding" pieHeight="200"
/>
</section>
<!-- generated from Findings section -->
</section>
</section>
<xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" href="snippets/report/methodology.xml"/>
<xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"
href="snippets/report/methodology.xml"/>
<section id="recon">
<title>Reconnaissance and Fingerprinting</title>
<p>Through automated scans we were able to gain the following information about the
software and infrastructure. Detailed scan output can be found in the sections
below.</p>
<table border="1"><tr><th>Fingerprinted Information</th></tr>
<tr><td>Windows XP<br/>Microsoft IIS 6.0<br/>PHP 5.4.29<br/>jQuery 1.7.2<br/>Mailserver XYZ<br/>FTPserver ABC</td></tr></table>
software and infrastructure. Detailed scan output can be found in the
sections below.</p>
<table border="1">
<tr>
<th>Fingerprinted Information</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Windows XP<br/>Microsoft IIS 6.0<br/>PHP 5.4.29<br/>jQuery
1.7.2<br/>Mailserver XYZ<br/>FTPserver ABC</td>
</tr>
</table>
<section id="scans">
<title>Automated Scans</title>
<p>As part of our active reconnaissance we used the following automated scans:</p>
<p>As part of our active reconnaissance we used the following automated
scans:</p>
<ul>
<li>nmap <a href="http://nmap.org">http://nmap.org</a></li>
<li>skipfish - <a href="https://code.google.com/p/skipfish/">https://code.google.com/p/skipfish/</a></li>
<li>skipfish -
<a href="https://code.google.com/p/skipfish/">https://code.google.com/p/skipfish/</a></li>
<li>sqlmap <a href="http://sqlmap.org">http://sqlmap.org</a></li>
<li>Wapiti <a href="http://wapiti.sourceforge.net">http://wapiti.sourceforge.net</a></li>
<li>Wapiti
<a href="http://wapiti.sourceforge.net">http://wapiti.sourceforge.net</a></li>
</ul>
<p>Of these, only the output of nmap turned out to be
useful; consequently only nmap and output will be discussed in
this section.</p>
<p>Of these, only the output of nmap turned out to be useful; consequently
only nmap and output will be discussed in this section.</p>
</section>
<section id="nmap">
<title>nmap</title>
<p>Command:</p>
<pre>$ nmap -vvvv -oA fishinabarrel.sittingduck.com_complete -sV -sC -A -p1-65535 -T5
fishinabarrel.sittingduck.com</pre>
<p>Outcome:</p>
<pre> Nmap scan report for fishinabarrel.sittingduck.com (10.10.10.1)
Starting Nmap 4.11 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2013-11-11 15:43 EST
@ -194,57 +222,65 @@ PORT STATE SERVICE
Nmap finished: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 0.485 seconds
Raw packets sent: 1681 (73.962KB) | Rcvd: 1681 (77.322KB)</pre>
<p>The scan revealed a very large number of open services on this machine, which
greatly increases the attack surface; see <a href="#f2"/> for more information on the
security risk.</p>
<p>The scan revealed a very large number of open services on this machine,
which greatly increases the attack surface; see <a href="#f2"/> for
more information on the security risk.</p>
</section>
</section>
<section id="techSummary">
<title>Pentest Technical Summary</title>
<section id="findings">
<title>Findings</title>
<p>We have identified the following issues:</p>
<finding id="f1" threatLevel="Moderate" type="Information Leak">
<title>PHPInfo Disclosure</title>
<description>
<p>The phpinfo() function of the PHP language is readable,
resulting in a listing of all the runtime information of the environment,
thus disclosing potentially valuable information to attackers.</p>
resulting in a listing of all the runtime
information of the environment, thus disclosing
potentially valuable information to attackers.</p>
</description>
<technicaldescription>
<p>This is where the good stuff goes. We give a detailed technical description of the problem.</p>
<p>Illustrative picture of an evil hacker pondering dark deeds:</p>
<p>This is where the good stuff goes. We give a detailed
technical description of the problem.</p>
<p>Illustrative picture of an evil hacker pondering dark
deeds:</p>
<img height="10" src="../graphics/screenshot.jpg"/>
</technicaldescription>
<impact>
<p>This is where we explain how the sh*t is hitting the fan, exactly.</p>
<p>This is where we explain how the sh*t is hitting the fan,
exactly.</p>
</impact>
<recommendation>
<p>Here is where we write some tips to solve the problem.</p>
<p>Here is where we write some tips to solve the
problem.</p>
</recommendation>
</finding>
<finding id="f2" threatLevel="High" type="XSS">
<title>A terrible XSS issue</title>
<description>
<p>A general description of the problem.</p>
</description>
<technicaldescription>
<p>This is we go into great detail about the vulnerability.</p>
<p>This is we go into great detail about the
vulnerability.</p>
</technicaldescription>
<impact>
<p>This is where we explain why this vulnerability is a problem.</p>
<p>This is where we explain why this vulnerability is a
problem.</p>
</impact>
<recommendation>
<p>This is where we solve everything and the sun starts shining again.</p>
<p>This is where we solve everything and the sun starts
shining again.</p>
</recommendation>
</finding>
<finding id="f3" threatLevel="Low" type="XSS">
<title>A not quite so terrible XSS issue</title>
<description>
@ -261,23 +297,24 @@ Raw packets sent: 1681 (73.962KB) | Rcvd: 1681 (77.322KB)</pre>
</recommendation>
</finding>
</section>
<section id="nonFindings">
<title>Non-Findings</title>
<p>In this section we list some of the things that were tried but turned out to be
dead ends.</p>
<p>In this section we list some of the things that were tried but turned out
to be dead ends.</p>
<non-finding id="ftp">
<title>FTP</title>
<p>The server was running FTPserver ABC, the most recent
version of this particular piece of software. Anonymous login was turned off and no
relevant vulnerabilities or exploits were found.</p>
<p>The server was running FTPserver ABC, the most recent version of
this particular piece of software. Anonymous login was
turned off and no relevant vulnerabilities or exploits were
found.</p>
</non-finding>
<non-finding id="mail">
<title>Mail Server</title>
<p>The server was running Mailserver XYZ, the most recent
version of this particular piece of software. No relevant vulnerabilities or
exploits were found. </p>
<p>The server was running Mailserver XYZ, the most recent version of
this particular piece of software. No relevant
vulnerabilities or exploits were found. </p>
</non-finding>
<non-finding id="sqlInjection">
<title>SQL Code Injection</title>
@ -286,37 +323,43 @@ Raw packets sent: 1681 (73.962KB) | Rcvd: 1681 (77.322KB)</pre>
<pre>-file1.php
-file2.php
-file3.php
</pre></non-finding>
</pre>
</non-finding>
<non-finding id="heartbleed">
<title>Heartbleed</title>
<p>System was not vulnerable to heartbleed.</p> </non-finding>
<p>System was not vulnerable to heartbleed.</p>
</non-finding>
<non-finding id="sp2">
<title>Windows XP</title>
<p>The host is running Windows XP. As we all know, Windows XP is bulletproof.</p>
<p>The host is running Windows XP. As we all know, Windows XP is
bulletproof.</p>
</non-finding>
</section>
</section>
<section id="conclusion">
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>In the course of this penetration test, we have demonstrated that the FishInABarrel
Web Application faces a range of security issues which makes it vulnerable to a number
of different attacks. Vulnerabilities found included: cross-site scripting (both stored
and reflected), cross-site request forgery, information disclosure
and lack of brute force protection.</p>
<p>Our conclusion is that there are a number of things that FishInABarrel BV has to fix before
Sitting Duck should use their software. A number of the security issues highlighted in this
report have fairly simple solutions, but these should nevertheless be fixed before use
of the FishInABarrel Web App continues.</p>
<p>We finally want to emphasize that security is a process and this penetration test is
just a one-time snapshot. Security posture must be continuously evaluated and improved.
Regular audits and ongoing improvements are essential in order to maintain control of
your corporate information security. We hope that this pentest report (and the detailed
explanations of our findings) will contribute meaningfully towards that end. Don't
hesitate to let us know if you have any further questions or need further clarification
of anything in this report.</p>
<p>In the course of this penetration test, we have demonstrated that the
FishInABarrel Web Application faces a range of security issues which makes
it vulnerable to a number of different attacks. Vulnerabilities found
included: cross-site scripting (both stored and reflected), cross-site
request forgery, information disclosure and lack of brute force
protection.</p>
<p>Our conclusion is that there are a number of things that FishInABarrel BV has to
fix before Sitting Duck should use their software. A number of the security
issues highlighted in this report have fairly simple solutions, but these
should nevertheless be fixed before use of the FishInABarrel Web App
continues.</p>
<p>We finally want to emphasize that security is a process and this penetration
test is just a one-time snapshot. Security posture must be continuously
evaluated and improved. Regular audits and ongoing improvements are
essential in order to maintain control of your corporate information
security. We hope that this pentest report (and the detailed explanations of
our findings) will contribute meaningfully towards that end. Don't hesitate
to let us know if you have any further questions or need further
clarification of anything in this report.</p>
</section>
<appendix id="testteam">
<title>Testing team</title>
<generate_testteam/>
</appendix>
</pentest_report>
</pentest_report>