url-abuse | URL Abuse - A Versatile Software | Security Testing library

by CIRCL Python Version: Current License: AGPL-3.0

X-Ray Key Features Code Snippets Community Discussions(1)Vulnerabilities Install Support

kandi X-RAY | url-abuse Summary

url-abuse is a Python library typically used in Testing, Security Testing applications. url-abuse has no bugs, it has no vulnerabilities, it has build file available, it has a Strong Copyleft License and it has low support. You can download it from GitHub.

URL Abuse is a versatile free software for URL review, analysis and black-list reporting. URL Abuse is composed of a web interface where requests are submitted asynchronously and a back-end system to process the URLs into features modules.

Support

Quality

Security

License

Reuse

Support

url-abuse has a low active ecosystem.

It has 129 star(s) with 28 fork(s). There are 33 watchers for this library.

It had no major release in the last 6 months.

There are 5 open issues and 6 have been closed. On average issues are closed in 3 days. There are 1 open pull requests and 0 closed requests.

It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.

The latest version of url-abuse is current.

Quality

url-abuse has 0 bugs and 0 code smells.

Security

url-abuse has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.

url-abuse code analysis shows 0 unresolved vulnerabilities.

There are 0 security hotspots that need review.

License

url-abuse is licensed under the AGPL-3.0 License. This license is Strong Copyleft.

Strong Copyleft licenses enforce sharing, and you can use them when creating open source projects.

Reuse

url-abuse releases are not available. You will need to build from source code and install.

Build file is available. You can build the component from source.

Installation instructions, examples and code snippets are available.

url-abuse saves you 564 person hours of effort in developing the same functionality from scratch.

It has 1317 lines of code, 100 functions and 21 files.

It has high code complexity. Code complexity directly impacts maintainability of the code.

Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA

kandi has reviewed url-abuse and discovered the below as its top functions. This is intended to give you an instant insight into url-abuse implemented functionality, and help decide if they suit your requirements.

Perform a WHOIS request
Generate a digest of the data
Sends an email
Return the cached data for a given url
Get BGPRanking for an IP
Gets a value from the cache
Store a key in the cache
Resolve a DNS entry
Return True if host is an IP address
Sleeps a given time in seconds
Return cached data
Get Google GSB query
Execute pnscir
Return the contents of ssl_circl
Prepare user authentication
Return Lookyloo instance
Perform a GSB query
Return a list of URLs for the given URL
Check if given URL is valid
Perform a PyEUPI search request
Check all backends
Query Phishtank API
Perform a VT query against a URL
Workhorse worker
Perform a PyPSSL query on the given URL
Query PyPDNS

Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

url-abuse Key Features

No Key Features are available at this moment for url-abuse.

url-abuse Examples and Code Snippets

No Code Snippets are available at this moment for url-abuse.

Community Discussions

Trending Discussions on Security Testing

DAST security scaning of a IoT Nodemcu esp8266 LUA script www HTML server connected to camera and A/C relay

QUESTION

DAST security scaning of a IoT Nodemcu esp8266 LUA script www HTML server connected to camera and A/C relay

Asked 2021-Apr-08 at 01:04

I have not, but shall DAST* security test, out of curiosity, an IoT device; Nodemcu esp8266 www server I built. It's showing a HTML page (on a mobile phone for example) that allows to control and interact with a camera module and a A/C relay. With it I can for example show images captured in the camera I even think it has some image recognition built in, and I can switch on and off a relay for electrical current to a light bulb (110/220v A/C power)

Before I start pentest I though I better start thinking of what types of exploits one would be able to find and detect? Which sinister exploits I will be able to find, or rather ought be able to find given a proper pentest exercise? (And if I do not find exploits, my approach to the pentest of the Iot might be wrong)

I ponder it might be a totally pointless exercise since the esp8266 www server (or rather its LUA programming libraries) might not have any security built into it, so basically it is "open doors" and everything with it is unsafe ?

The test report might just conclude what I can foresee be that the the "user input needs to be sanitized"?

Anyone have any idea what such pentest of a generic IoT device generally reports? Maybe it is possible to crash or reset the IoT device? Buffer overruns, XXS, call own code ?

I might use ZAP or Burpsuite or similar DAST security test tool.

I could of course SAST test it instead, or too, but I think it will be hard to find a static code analyzer for the NodeMCU libraries and NUA scripting language easily ? I found some references here though: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8227299 but it seems to be a long read.

So if someone just have a short answer what to expect in a DAST scan/pentest , it would be much appreciated.

Stay safe and secure out there ! Zombieboy

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Apr-08 at 01:04

I do my vulnerability scanning with OpenVAS (I assume this is what you mean by pentesting?). I am not aware of any IOT focused Tools.

If your server is running on esp8266, i would imagine that there is no much room for authentication and encryption of http traffic, but correct me if i am wrong).

Vulnerability Scan results might show things like unencrypted http traffic, credentials transmitted in cleartext (if you have any credentials fields in the pages served by the web server) etc. Depending on if there is encryption, you might also see weak encryption findings.

You might get some false positives on your lua webserver reacting like other known webservers when exploits are applied. I have seen this kind of false positive specially on DoS vulnerabilities when a vulnerability scan is testing a vulnerability and the server becomes unresponsive. Depending on how invasive your vulnerability scanner is, you might get a lot of false positives for DoS on such a constrained platform.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66995125

Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network