Abstract

Open-source software refers to a licensed program that is availed to people for modification, updating and study purpose. Python is one of the most popular open-source software used for programming of application software and web design (Steven, 2006). Security issues are a key threat to python because hackers gain access to sensitive information due to errors made by other users. Moreover, the security of a web application is one of the most important factor to the integrity of a system which are underlines of the same application.

The paper evaluates SQL injection software vulnerability in python. It occurs when a damaged code is executed in the server-side of an application by a hacker and is done via command line interface or SQL injection. In the event of CRUD operations on the user side are not well defined and poorly structured so that, the software left vulnerable to SQL injection its own software. A SQL is a query design programming language that creates, stores, manipulates, update and stores data in a database. SQL injection includes inserting damaged code into queries of databases in order to gain use of privileged web databases which contains customer information, social media data and secret data. Examples of SQL database are MySQL, Microsoft SQL, Oracle and SQL (Morales et al, 2010). It also emerges when input data is not checked for bugs before being executed, corrupt user inputs pave the way for malicious injections to the encrypted files. Repeated use of modules in various python versions before updating them poses another security issue.

Automated tasks trigger SQL attacks because it is administered recursively with much ease on large databases within a short time span (Steven, 2006). This vulnerability is enhanced when end users download and install insecure modules and packages before scanning them for malicious codes since if an errors present are interpreted, then the whole code is prone to attacks. Command line injection is less effective compared to SQL based because it takes more time and cannot be automated. Hackers identify weak links in codes then take advantage by launching system attacks.

Introduction

SQL injection is a software vulnerability that allows an attacker to interfere with the queries that an application makes to its database (Yeole and Meshram, 2011). Through SQL injection, the attacker is able to modify, or delete, thus making significant changes to the original content or behavior of the application. A successful attack leads to the unauthorized access to sensitive data, including personal user information and passwords. SQL injection has been responsible for several recent high-profile data breaches, which have resulted in reputational harm, and regulatory fines. In instances where the attacker gains persistent backdoor into an organization system, a long-term compromise is likely to occur. The paper evaluates SQL injection software vulnerability in python. It occurs when a damaged code is executed in the server-side of an application by a hacker and is done via command line interface or SQL injection.

SQL Injection Software Vulnerability

The language most commonly used for communicating with relational databases is known as SQL, which stands for Structured Query Language. Examples of SQL database are MySQL, Microsoft SQL, Oracle and SQL (Morales et al, 2010). Databases are used to develop applications and other programming forms to store user information, such as login credentials and usernames. Databases are frequently the most efficient and reliable solution for the storage of different forms of data, including public blog posts and comments, as well as confidential bank account details.

SQL statements typically use parameters to transfer data from users into a protected database or vice versa. Attackers can exploit the places where your app communicates with a database using a SQL argument to gain access to confidential information and other secured areas if the values in these user-supplied SQL arguments are not secured using sanitization or prepared statements. This is because attackers can manipulate these places to gain access to the database. However, there is a way in which the SQL software can be kept secure.

During the reconnaissance stage, which consists of research to identify and select targets, attackers will hunt for places in your application where they can send random values to SQL statements. This research is part of the process of identifying and selecting targets.

Suppressing error messages is not nearly enough; standard techniques for locating SQL vulnerabilities include inserting single quotes and semicolons into user input data and searching for error messages that return information about database structure and naming schemes. Suppressing error messages is not sufficient.

SQL injection assaults are easy to automate, meaning you need the most satisfactory defense possible in both brainpower and scanning tools (Kareem et al., 2021). It is not always the case that you will compete against someone you need to outsmart. When an attacker has discovered a vulnerability in your app, the next step in their process is to write their SQL statements and utilize them to control your app's behavior. Attackers have the potential to obtain access to confidential data, administrative functions, or other secured portions of your app if their attack is successful.

Open Source Software Vulnerability

Open source vulnerabilities present substantial dangers to application security, although open source software confers numerous advantages to businesses and the teams that produce its software.

Many different development teams use open-source software because it helps accelerate the delivery of digital innovation. Open-source software components that have been pre-built and reusable are routinely incorporated into traditional and agile software development methods. On the other hand, most open-source software does not go through the same level of testing as specially built software. According to a study conducted in 2014 on more than 5,300 enterprise applications, open source components were found to be responsible for introducing an average of 24 known vulnerabilities into each website (Veracode). There are several vulnerabilities in open source software that could put an organization at risk of being attacked in various ways, including via malware injections, data breaches, and denial-of-service assaults (DoS).

PCI, OWASP, and FS-ISAC are just some organizations that have recently put precise controls and regulations in place to oversee the usage of open source components. These measures were taken to mitigate the risk of open source vulnerabilities in the software supply chain. However, suppose an organization is operating on a worldwide scale and has a large number of separate code repositories. In that case, it may be challenging to locate all of the apps that may include open source vulnerabilities.

There have been various high-profile software vulnerabilities in the history of human life. Some are Heartbleed, Shellshock, Drupageddon, GHOST, POODLE, etcetera. In this assessment, the focus is on POODLE (CVE-2014-8730).

POODLE, another Heartbleed-like vulnerability discovered in the decade-old but widely used Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) 3.0 cryptographic protocol in October 2014, allowed hackers to decrypt the contents of encrypted connections to websites. POODLE stands for "Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption" and this vulnerability has enabled cybercriminals to carry out Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks to intercept traffic between a user's browser and an HTTPS website in order to decrypt sensitive information including the user's authentication cookies (Shulman and Waidner, 2021). The vulnerability was later patched and fixed by web admins around the world after Google notified software and hardware vendors. However, the flaw once again made its way in late 2014, this time affecting implementations of the more modern Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, which is the ostensibly more secure successor of SSL.

POODLE affected some of the most visited websites on the internet, such as those owned or administered by Accenture, Bank of America, and the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, were among those that were compromised due to a security flaw. POODLE is an attack that targets websites that make use of load balancers that have an erroneous implementation of encryption padding checks. This attack affects almost 10 percent of servers around the globe. Specific models of F5 and A10 load balancers were also susceptible to be vulnerable to the POODLE attack.

The POODLE can be remedied by following a set of instructions. In order to defend against the POODLE attack, it is necessary to turn off support for SSL 3.0 in all browsers and servers, and a secure TLS configuration should be implemented, ideally one capable of supporting TLS 1.2 or above (Hu et al., 2021). In addition, you need to ensure that the TLS FALLBACK SCSV option is enabled. This protocol addition ensures that the protocol will never revert to an earlier protocol version during a negotiation, even if that protocol version is older than the most recent SSL or TLS version that the server can support. When TLS FALLBACK SCSV is implemented, it ensures that SSL is only utilized when an already existing legacy system is in play and not in response to a downgrade attack that compels the server to skip versions and instead downgrade to SSL 3.0 (Hu et al., 2021). This prevents the forced downgrade from taking place and, as a result, the entire POODLE assault from taking place.

SQL Injection in Python and PHP

The mechanism of preventing open software SQL injection is dependent on the type of software used. The method applied in python may vary from the one recommended in PHP, or even JavaScript. However, the general important technique of preventing SQL injection is avoiding vulnerable code and insecure coding practices (Baynarova, 2014). Some of the measures that can be applied to hinder SQL injection in Python include: authenticating packages, identifying vulnerabilities, using Linters & Static Analysis Tools (SAST), and using Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (Marques, 2021). Automated tasks trigger SQL attacks because it is administered recursively with much ease on large databases within a short time span (Steven, 2006). This vulnerability is enhanced when end users download and install insecure modules and packages before scanning them for malicious codes since if an errors present are interpreted, then the whole code is prone to attacks.

Software Vulnerability Prevention

Testing is key to identifying vulnerabilities in the system software code. Website creators should opt for robust tools such as DAST, which analyzes the software from the outside (just like an attacker would), and SAST, which analyzes vulnerabilities at code level (Marques, 2021). The areas where the app connects with the database should be looked at attempts made to pass the unusual values. For instance, if a value that contains a single quote is entered, the program may treat it either as user data, or as a code. And if a tautological test such as ‘OR 1=1’ in the input, the program access I either gained as though you entered a valid password or rejected.

It's time to fix vulnerabilities once you've found them. The ideal approach to achieve this is to provide user-inputted values to your statements. At the same time, they are being executed by using parameters whenever you need to make SQL queries to a database, entering placeholder values in your statements, and doing so whenever necessary. You can fix your code if your programming language does not support parameters by sanitizing or escaping input before sending it to a database. This signals to your app that user input is data rather than instructions to run code. To lessen the risk, mitigation is likewise a crucial technique, but it does so without fixing the underlying problem. Instead of looking at your app's code, you may, for instance, ensure that database accounts used by your app have the fewest privileges necessary to read or insert data into your database by checking their access rights.

Conclusion

In this paper, the evaluation of software vulnerabilities in the context of SQL injection has been studied. Among others, the evaluation looked at the SQL injection, where the definition and overview of the concept was presented. The evaluation further looked at the high-profile software vulnerabilities witnessed in the history of the human race, where the focus was on POODLE. The research culminated with the prevention of SQL injection in python.