If your domain name parser can’t handle internationalized domain names, then maybe that’s your parser’s problem

Raymond C

A security vulnerability report arrived that went roughly like this:

Internet Explorer has a security vulnerability that allows an attacker to bypass domain filtering. Suppose my web site filters domain names, say with the following test:

if ($frame_domain == "microsoft.com") {

An attacker can construct a frame which targets an intentional misspelling:

<iframe src="https://ⓜicrosoft.com" ...>

Even though the “ⓜ” is the Unicode character CIRCLED LATIN SMALL LETTER M (U+24DC), the web page that is shown in the frame is indeed microsoft.com. The web browser rewrote the domain, allowing an attacker to bypass filtering.

Yes, this is all true. The web browser rewrote the domain, allowing an attacker to bypass filtering. But the bug is not in the web browser. The web browser is doing exactly what the standard says it’s supposed to do: Unicode Technical Standard #46 describes how so-called international domain names are converted to ASCII for domain lookup purposes. One of the steps is to map the code points according to the IDNA Mapping Table, and the IDNA Mapping Table says that character CIRCLED LATIN SMALL LETTER M (U+24DC) is mapped to LATIN SMALL LETTER M (U+006D).

The bug is in the code which tries to block access to microsoft.com. It’s performing a literal string comparison against microsoft.com without going through the IDN conversion process. Indeed, you didn’t even need to use IDN to attack the filter.

<iframe src="https://microsoft.com." ...>

As we learned some time ago, microsoft.com is technically shorthand for the full name microsoft.com. with a trailing period. But the above filter doesn’t handle that case, so appending a dot easily avoids the filter.

Hang on, it’s even easier:

<iframe src="https://Microsoft.com" ...>

The filter used a case-sensitive comparison, but domain names are case-insensitive, so Microsoft.com sneaks past the filter.

And, of course, you could gain access to microsoft.com by using its IP address explicitly.

None of this is the fault of the web browser. The problem is in the attempt at filtering the domains that can be placed inside frames. If you set up an insecure system, don’t be surprised that it has a security issue.


Comments are closed. Login to edit/delete your existing comments

  • Mystery Man

    Suppose my web site filters domain names

    Excuse me? 😲 What in the name of heavens this customer is trying to do? More specifically, which component is filtering what? Let’s assume I did open “microsoft.com”; how did this customer expect to intercept my request in the first place, let alone filter it?

    I think a huge chunk of the puzzle is missing here.

    • Brian Boorman

      Sounds like they are trying to block access to certain domains (the microsoft.com is probably just an anonymization on Raymond’s part). A poor man’s version of something like McAfee Web Gateway that blocks access to certain categories of sites while on the workplace network.

      Surely it’s cheaper and easier to implement your own vs buying a solution

  • Neil Rashbrook

    These days new URL("https://ⓜicrosoft.coM").hostname seems to do some of the work for you, although not quite enough for the given use case.