Re: SQL Injection Prevention
From: Nigel Rivett (sqlnr_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/28/04
- Next message: hundredhouses: "Re: VB 6, SQL Server 2000, xp_cmdshell"
- Previous message: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- In reply to: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Next in thread: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Reply: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Reply: Nigel Rivett: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:11:03 -0700
You're comparing a well built parameterized sql statement against a badly
built stored procedure so it's obvious which will win.
Stored procedures are easier to review and so catch bad proctices and are
usually the domain of people who have some experience in dealing with
databases.
>> for stored procedure to return the same cursor as select, this stored procedure has to execute the same select.
Not true.
>> if stored procedure implemented wrong way - ie it constructs sql by concatenating received parameter with sql string,
I can't believe anyone would do that - if you would consider it then I
suggest you stay away from databases altogether :).
The stored procedure in your example would probably be
create proc a
@key int
as
select somevalue from sometable where somekey = @key
go
You need to build a case that this is more vulnerable than the apllication
code - bearing in mind that a person writing a stored proc is likely to have
more database experience than the person writing the app code.
>> in Oracle you have possibility to execute dynamic cursor from stored procedure. Ie. you construct whatever sql string inside stored procedure and open cursor on
that string. I believe it must be similar functionality in SQL server
Your belief is very wrong (and I hope you aren't trying to use that belief).
p.s. I've have never written an explicit cursor in t-sql (except to "help"
others and never will).
"Valery Pryamikov" wrote:
> Tibor,
> we aren't talking about good programming practices when we discuss SQL
> injection, aren't we :-).
> as long as there is possibility to screw something, we have to account for
> it. Therefore my statement stays that parameterized SQL actually provides
> better protection against SQL injection than parameterized call to stored
> procedure.
>
> -Valery.
> http://www.harper.no/valery
>
- Next message: hundredhouses: "Re: VB 6, SQL Server 2000, xp_cmdshell"
- Previous message: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- In reply to: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Next in thread: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Reply: Valery Pryamikov: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Reply: Nigel Rivett: "Re: SQL Injection Prevention"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|