Difference between revisions of "Talk:Testing: Conduct search engine discovery/reconnaissance for information leakage (OTG-INFO-001)"

From OWASP
Jump to: navigation, search
m
(Draft Reply to Rick Mitchell)
Line 17: Line 17:
  
 
:: I also wonder if we should be including examples such as xssed.com and their ilk, web.archive.org, etc [[User:Rick.mitchell|Rick.mitchell]] ([[User talk:Rick.mitchell|talk]])
 
:: I also wonder if we should be including examples such as xssed.com and their ilk, web.archive.org, etc [[User:Rick.mitchell|Rick.mitchell]] ([[User talk:Rick.mitchell|talk]])
 +
 +
Adding web services, such as xxsed.com or web.archive.org, would depend on if they an API available to the public (I believe archive.org has and API) and if there is a product available (possibly released under FOSS licenses) to provide an example.

Revision as of 18:17, 15 August 2013

Contents


v3 Review Comments

This section does not cover the items stated in the "brief summary". For v3, if the section is to remain completely google'centric I suggest we rename "Search engine discovery" to "Google searching your web application and accessing google's cache".

Reply to "v3 Review Comments" from @cmlh

The roadmap was to add Yahoo! and Bing to the next release of the OWASP Testing Guide (i.e. v3 -> v4) and to not appear to promote Google over Yahoo! and Bing. It should be noted that Yahoo! and Bing might refer to the same "entity" as further research is undertaken i.e. the "Yahoo! and Microsoft Search Alliance"/"Yahoo! Bing Network".

Furthermore, the intent is *not* to promote the inferior http://www.hackersforcharity.org/ghdb/, rather a more scientific and innovative approach.

Hi cmlh, thanks for the follow-up. That comment was really old and seems to have been migrated for the v3 > v4 draft. I think the new heading/title is more appropriate than previously, however, the content still seems awfully google'centric.
Should we also be including some Shodan stuff? (http://www.shodanhq.com/) Rick.mitchell (talk)
Actually now that I'm looking at this. I'm not sure how the heading has changed since v3 was a draft (when the comment was originally made). However, again looking at this now there are a number of goals, etc stated in the summary that don't seem to be covered by the content. Also the summary seems to be written from the perspective of a app/system owner not a tester.
I also wonder if we should be including examples such as xssed.com and their ilk, web.archive.org, etc Rick.mitchell (talk)

Adding web services, such as xxsed.com or web.archive.org, would depend on if they an API available to the public (I believe archive.org has and API) and if there is a product available (possibly released under FOSS licenses) to provide an example.