azurit

icon location I'm security engineer with 20+ years of experience in the field of cyber security. Follow me if you like my work.

Results 279 comments of azurit

fix(security): resolve SQL injection protection bypass (942380 PL2)

Ready to review (again)!

fix(security): resolve SQL injection protection bypass (942380 PL2)

Ready to review again.

feat: accidental firewall disability prevention

> I agree it can happen, but any functionality test of the WAF will fail afterwards anyways. It depends, most of the exclusion rules looks like this: ``` SecRule REQUEST_FILENAME...

feat: accidental firewall disability prevention

See: [#1](https://www.google.com/search?q="ctl%3AruleRemoveById%3D949110") [#2](https://github.com/coreruleset/coreruleset/issues?q=is%3Aissue+%22ctl%3AruleRemoveById%3D949110%22)

feat: accidental firewall disability prevention

This one is real fun. :) [#3](https://www.google.com/search?q="SecRuleRemoveById+949110")

feat: accidental firewall disability prevention

Few are also here: [#4](https://github.com/coreruleset/coreruleset/issues?q=is%3Aissue+%22SecRuleRemoveById+949110%22)

feat: accidental firewall disability prevention

I assume we don't want this. Closing.

feat: improve detection of onwebkitplaybacktargetavailabilitychanged event

@Osb0rn3 Ping.

feat: added detection for RCE via Referer header

@Xhoenix You are doing double URL decode using `t:urlDecodeUni` action: First one in the first rule and second one in the last rule. All rules are using the same data...

feat: added detection for RCE via Referer header

Also, i don't think we need such a complex rule for this. According to RFC 9110, `Referer` header cannot include a fragment (`#`). We should create a simple rule which...