Author lemburg
Recipients Arach, Arfrever, Huzaifa.Sidhpurwala, Mark.Shannon, PaulMcMillan, Zhiping.Deng, alex, barry, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, dmalcolm, eric.araujo, georg.brandl, gvanrossum, gz, jcea, lemburg, pitrou, skrah, terry.reedy, tim.peters, v+python, vstinner, zbysz
Date 2012-01-11.15:41:08
SpamBayes Score 2.11458e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
Mark Shannon wrote:
> Mark Shannon <> added the comment:
>>>>  * the method would need to be implemented for all hashable Python types
>>> It was already discussed, and it was said that only hash(str) need to
>>> be modified.
>> Really ? What about the much simpler attack on integer hash values ?
>> You only have to send a specially crafted JSON dictionary with integer
>> keys to a Python web server providing JSON interfaces in order to
>> trigger the integer hash attack.
> JSON objects are decoded as dicts with string keys, integers keys are 
> not possible.
>  >>> json.loads(json.dumps({1:2}))
> {'1': 2}

Thanks for the correction. Looks like XML-RPC also doesn't accept
integers as dict keys. That's good :-)

However, as Paul already noted, such attacks can also occur in other
places or parsers in an application, e.g. when decoding FORM parameters
that use integers to signal a line or parameter position (example:
value_1=2&value_2=3...) which are then converted into a dictionary
mapping the position integer to the data.

marshal and pickle are vulnerable, but then you normally don't expose
those to untrusted data.
Date User Action Args
2012-01-11 15:41:09lemburgsetrecipients: + lemburg, gvanrossum, tim.peters, barry, georg.brandl, terry.reedy, jcea, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, eric.araujo, Arfrever, v+python, alex, zbysz, skrah, dmalcolm, gz, Arach, Mark.Shannon, Zhiping.Deng, Huzaifa.Sidhpurwala, PaulMcMillan
2012-01-11 15:41:09lemburglinkissue13703 messages
2012-01-11 15:41:08lemburgcreate