Heine

Specifications should be a major part of the foundation we built on. Unfortunately, we're a bit loose with our adherence to specs. (Writer is guilty too).

While this was written before, I've decided to use it as a short illustration to #1109854 - Overly aggressive transliteration in drupal_clean_css_identifier on the difference between HTML and CSS with regards to 'allowed' characters.

Best to skip if you don't care about specifications ;)

Today we released a security announcement about a Webform SQL Injection vulnerability outside of the normal release schedule on Wednesday.

I chose to release today with a minimal fix instead of waiting until January 12th for a combination of reasons:

1. The vulnerability was made public.
2. The injection requires no permissions at all.
3. High impact; easy uid 1 access.
4. No other user interaction required.
5. Webform was under high scrutiny last week due to the Geenstijl shockblog.
6. We received news today that the hole was being actively exploited.

This combination could turn out to be very damaging for a lot of Drupal sites should we have waited longer.

Versions

To clear up any confusion regarding the affected supported branches; only Webform 6.x-3.x is affected. Users of Webform 6.x.3.x should upgrade to Webform 6.x-3.5.

The Webform 6.x-2.x versions are not affected by this vulnerability. As long as you use 6.x-2.8, 6.x-2.9 or 6.x-2.10 you're good. Older versions of the Webform 6.x-2.x branch have different vulnerabilities that were already announced.

Webform for Drupal 5.x and the 7.x betas are not supported by the security team.

Apart from PHP bugs and Denial of Service attacks, there's another reason why calling unserialize on user-supplied data (cookies, hidden form fields) is a bad idea.

We recently received a report by "ZeroDayScan", about a "Full path disclosure bug in Drupal 6.16".

You can read the story @ http://blog.zerodayscan.com/2010/04/full-path-disclosure-bug-in-drupal-6.... As my short comment was removed from the post, I have to resort to a blogpost. My apologies for polluting the Planet.

Summary of the issue: If you set error reporting to the default value "Write errors to the log and to the screen", the installation path is displayed on the ...*drumroll*... screen.

Which is of course the point.

Is your recent Drupal update not taking effect? Drupal still claims to be the old version?

It is probably correct! There's at least one module on your system that claims it is 1) a core module and 2) old. How did this happen? Common scenarios are:

• You accidentally restored the old modules folder from a backup.
• You tried to overwrite the older install, but this failed for some reason (common on ftp).
• You made a backup of core modules inside the modules or sites folder.
• You copied a core module to sites/default/modules or sites/[site]/modules to override a core module.
• You are looking at the wrong server (embarrassing, but it happens).

Remember, Drupal prefers core files in sites/all/modules or sites/[site]/modules over those in modules when it finds copies.

To identify the actual files in use, check the filename and info columns for core modules in the system table. If you don't like touching your database, install the Update: DOH! module. It will give you a list of filenames and their versions.

The Friendconnect module on code.google.com is not suitable for use on production sites. My message to the 36 people who've already downloaded the module:

Test on a local site only!

I'd rather have posted this as a comments on Bertboerland's Friendconnect story, but his server ran out of steam.