What Exploit Are These User Agents Trying to Use?What is SPL exploit?What kind of security injection are...
Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic
Machine learning testing data
Is it "common practice in Fourier transform spectroscopy to multiply the measured interferogram by an apodizing function"? If so, why?
Notepad++ delete until colon for every line with replace all
Knowledge-based authentication using Domain-driven Design in C#
What exactly is ineptocracy?
How badly should I try to prevent a user from XSSing themselves?
What are the G forces leaving Earth orbit?
How could sorcerers who are able to produce/manipulate almost all forms of energy communicate over large distances?
What is the fastest integer factorization to break RSA?
What historical events would have to change in order to make 19th century "steampunk" technology possible?
How does a dynamic QR code work?
Is there a hemisphere-neutral way of specifying a season?
How do conventional missiles fly?
How obscure is the use of 令 in 令和?
Car headlights in a world without electricity
Why was the shrink from 8″ made only to 5.25″ and not smaller (4″ or less)
Is it possible to create a QR code using text?
My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?
How dangerous is XSS
How to stretch the corners of this image so that it looks like a perfect rectangle?
Placement of More Information/Help Icon button for Radio Buttons
What is an equivalently powerful replacement spell for Yuan-Ti's Suggestion spell?
Convert seconds to minutes
What Exploit Are These User Agents Trying to Use?
What is SPL exploit?What kind of security injection are these traces of, SQL, javascript, or otherwise?Is it illegal to use Fake User-agents?Server attack attempts, what are they trying to achieve?Can I exploit Windows kernel from user-mode application?HTTP attack taking down PHP-FPMSegmentation fault trying to exploit printf vulnerabilityWhat web servers are affected by this user agent exploit?Which exploit and which payload use?Help on what to do with these suspicious logs
I just looked at my user agent tracking page on my site (archived on Yandex) and I noticed these user agents. I believe they are an attempt to exploit my server (NGinx with PHP). The 1 in front of it is just how many times the user agent was seen in the NGinx log. These are also shortened user agents and not long ones like Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36. I no longer have access to the logs as I presume this occurred sometime in January or February (my oldest logs are in March and I created the site in January).
1 Mozilla/5.9}print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);{
1 Mozilla/5.9{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}
1 Mozilla/5.9x22{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}x22
1 Mozilla/5.9x22];print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);//
1 Mozilla/5.9x22
What exploit was attempted and how can I test to ensure these exploits are not usable?
exploit webserver web nginx anti-exploitation
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
add a comment |
I just looked at my user agent tracking page on my site (archived on Yandex) and I noticed these user agents. I believe they are an attempt to exploit my server (NGinx with PHP). The 1 in front of it is just how many times the user agent was seen in the NGinx log. These are also shortened user agents and not long ones like Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36. I no longer have access to the logs as I presume this occurred sometime in January or February (my oldest logs are in March and I created the site in January).
1 Mozilla/5.9}print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);{
1 Mozilla/5.9{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}
1 Mozilla/5.9x22{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}x22
1 Mozilla/5.9x22];print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);//
1 Mozilla/5.9x22
What exploit was attempted and how can I test to ensure these exploits are not usable?
exploit webserver web nginx anti-exploitation
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
add a comment |
I just looked at my user agent tracking page on my site (archived on Yandex) and I noticed these user agents. I believe they are an attempt to exploit my server (NGinx with PHP). The 1 in front of it is just how many times the user agent was seen in the NGinx log. These are also shortened user agents and not long ones like Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36. I no longer have access to the logs as I presume this occurred sometime in January or February (my oldest logs are in March and I created the site in January).
1 Mozilla/5.9}print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);{
1 Mozilla/5.9{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}
1 Mozilla/5.9x22{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}x22
1 Mozilla/5.9x22];print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);//
1 Mozilla/5.9x22
What exploit was attempted and how can I test to ensure these exploits are not usable?
exploit webserver web nginx anti-exploitation
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
I just looked at my user agent tracking page on my site (archived on Yandex) and I noticed these user agents. I believe they are an attempt to exploit my server (NGinx with PHP). The 1 in front of it is just how many times the user agent was seen in the NGinx log. These are also shortened user agents and not long ones like Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36. I no longer have access to the logs as I presume this occurred sometime in January or February (my oldest logs are in March and I created the site in January).
1 Mozilla/5.9}print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);{
1 Mozilla/5.9{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}
1 Mozilla/5.9x22{${print(238947899389478923-34567343546345)}}x22
1 Mozilla/5.9x22];print(238947899389478923-34567343546345);//
1 Mozilla/5.9x22
What exploit was attempted and how can I test to ensure these exploits are not usable?
exploit webserver web nginx anti-exploitation
exploit webserver web nginx anti-exploitation
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
asked 3 hours ago
SenorContentoSenorContento
256
256
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It looks to be trying to exploit some form of command injection. As DarkMatter mentioned in his answer, this was likely a broad attempt to find any vulnerable servers, rather than targeting you specifically. The payload itself just appears to just be testing to see if the server is vulnerable to command injection. It does not appear to have any additional purpose.
In order to test if you would be affected by these specific payloads, the easiest way would be to send them to your own server, and see how they respond. Note, that I only say this because the payloads themselves are benign; I do not recommend doing this with all payloads.
My bet is that your server is not vulnerable, because I would have expected to see follow up request to actually exploit your server.
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
add a comment |
It is probably nothing. It seems like the broad spam of a scanner looking across the web for any website that evaluates and returns that subtraction when it shouldn't. It is a pretty common thing to see.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "162"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f206649%2fwhat-exploit-are-these-user-agents-trying-to-use%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It looks to be trying to exploit some form of command injection. As DarkMatter mentioned in his answer, this was likely a broad attempt to find any vulnerable servers, rather than targeting you specifically. The payload itself just appears to just be testing to see if the server is vulnerable to command injection. It does not appear to have any additional purpose.
In order to test if you would be affected by these specific payloads, the easiest way would be to send them to your own server, and see how they respond. Note, that I only say this because the payloads themselves are benign; I do not recommend doing this with all payloads.
My bet is that your server is not vulnerable, because I would have expected to see follow up request to actually exploit your server.
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
add a comment |
It looks to be trying to exploit some form of command injection. As DarkMatter mentioned in his answer, this was likely a broad attempt to find any vulnerable servers, rather than targeting you specifically. The payload itself just appears to just be testing to see if the server is vulnerable to command injection. It does not appear to have any additional purpose.
In order to test if you would be affected by these specific payloads, the easiest way would be to send them to your own server, and see how they respond. Note, that I only say this because the payloads themselves are benign; I do not recommend doing this with all payloads.
My bet is that your server is not vulnerable, because I would have expected to see follow up request to actually exploit your server.
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
add a comment |
It looks to be trying to exploit some form of command injection. As DarkMatter mentioned in his answer, this was likely a broad attempt to find any vulnerable servers, rather than targeting you specifically. The payload itself just appears to just be testing to see if the server is vulnerable to command injection. It does not appear to have any additional purpose.
In order to test if you would be affected by these specific payloads, the easiest way would be to send them to your own server, and see how they respond. Note, that I only say this because the payloads themselves are benign; I do not recommend doing this with all payloads.
My bet is that your server is not vulnerable, because I would have expected to see follow up request to actually exploit your server.
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
It looks to be trying to exploit some form of command injection. As DarkMatter mentioned in his answer, this was likely a broad attempt to find any vulnerable servers, rather than targeting you specifically. The payload itself just appears to just be testing to see if the server is vulnerable to command injection. It does not appear to have any additional purpose.
In order to test if you would be affected by these specific payloads, the easiest way would be to send them to your own server, and see how they respond. Note, that I only say this because the payloads themselves are benign; I do not recommend doing this with all payloads.
My bet is that your server is not vulnerable, because I would have expected to see follow up request to actually exploit your server.
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
answered 2 hours ago
user52472user52472
2,422614
2,422614
add a comment |
add a comment |
It is probably nothing. It seems like the broad spam of a scanner looking across the web for any website that evaluates and returns that subtraction when it shouldn't. It is a pretty common thing to see.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
add a comment |
It is probably nothing. It seems like the broad spam of a scanner looking across the web for any website that evaluates and returns that subtraction when it shouldn't. It is a pretty common thing to see.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
add a comment |
It is probably nothing. It seems like the broad spam of a scanner looking across the web for any website that evaluates and returns that subtraction when it shouldn't. It is a pretty common thing to see.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
It is probably nothing. It seems like the broad spam of a scanner looking across the web for any website that evaluates and returns that subtraction when it shouldn't. It is a pretty common thing to see.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
answered 3 hours ago
DarkMatterDarkMatter
2,1081120
2,1081120
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Information Security Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f206649%2fwhat-exploit-are-these-user-agents-trying-to-use%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
