Password Management: Hardcoded Password

ABSTRACT

Hardcoded password 可能會削弱系統安全性，并且無法輕易修正出現的安全問題。

EXPLANATION

使用硬編碼方式處理密碼絕非好方法。這不僅是因為所有項目開發人員都可以使用通過硬編碼方式處理的密碼，而且還會使解決這一問題變得極其困難。一旦代碼投入使用，除非對軟件進行修補，否則您再也不能改變密碼了。如果帳戶中的密碼保護減弱，系統所有者將被迫在安全性和可行性之間做出選擇。


例：以下代碼對密碼進行了硬編碼：

pwd = "tiger"
        ...
		response.writeln("Password:"+ pwd) 
?>

該代碼可以正常運行，但是任何有該代碼權限的人都能得到這個密碼。一旦程序發布，將無法變更 "tiger" 密碼，除非是要修補該程序。心懷不軌的雇員可以利用手中掌握的信息訪問權限入侵系統。更糟的是，如果攻擊者能夠訪問應用程序的二進制碼，他們就可以利用多種常用的反編譯器來訪問經過反匯編的代碼，而在這些代碼中恰恰包含著用戶使用過的密碼值。

REFERENCES

[1] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 - (OWASP 2010) A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage

[2] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 - (OWASP 2007) A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage

[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 - (OWASP 2004) A8 Insecure Storage

[4] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3 - (STIG 3) APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3340 CAT I, APP3350 CAT I

[5] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 - (STIG 3.4) APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3340 CAT I, APP3350 CAT I

[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration - (CWE) CWE ID 259, CWE ID 798

[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 - (FISMA) IA

[8] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 - (SANS 2009) Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259

[9] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 - (SANS 2010) Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798

[10] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 - (SANS Top 25 2011) Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798

[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 - (PCI 1.2) Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4

[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 - (PCI 2.0) Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4

[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 - (PCI 1.1) Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4

97av