程序代写代做代考 SQL flex Instructure’s Canvas Bugcrowd Flex Program and Retest Results March 24, 2016

Instructure’s Canvas Bugcrowd Flex Program and Retest Results March 24, 2016

Executive Summary
Instructure engaged Bugcrowd Inc to perform a Flex Bounty Program (”Flex”), commonly known as a crowd-sourced penetration test, on Instructure’s Canvas. Testing occurred during the period: 11/17/2015 – 12/11/2015.
For this Flex, 56 researchers were invited to participate; 45 accepted the invitation, resulting in 138 vulnerability submissions received from 26 unique researchers. These issues ranged in scope and severity, with 3 high priority P2 issue(s) discovered. As a whole, researchers with rewardable submissions received $19,300 out of a total prize pool of $20,000.
This report is just a summary of the information available. You can find all details – including vulnerability remediation – of your program in the Bugcrowd Crowdcontrol Tracker: https://tracker.bugcrowd.com. If you have any questions or comments, please contact support@bugcrowd.com.
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016 2 of 8

Methodology
The strength of crowdsourced testing lies in multiple researchers, the pay-for-results model, and the varied methodologies that the researchers implement. To this end, we encourage researchers to use their own individual methodologies on Bugcrowd Flex programs.
The workflow of every penetration test can be divided into four phases: reconnaissance, enumeration, exploitation and documentation.
• Reconnaissance:
Gathering information before the attack
• Enumeration: Finding attack vectors
• Exploitation:
Verifying security weaknesses
• Documentation: Collecting results
Bugcrowd researchers who perform web application testing and vulnerability assessment usually subscribe to a variety of methodologies following this workflow, including: the OWASP 4.0 Testing Guide, the Penetration Testers Execution Standard, and the WAHH Methodology.
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016 3 of 8

Priority Key
The following priority matrix is used as a guideline to classify valid assessment findings:
Priority Impact Example Vulnerability Types
P1 – Critical
Vulnerabilities that cause a privilege escalation from unprivileged to admin or allow for remote execution, financial theft, etc.
• Remote Code Execution
• Vertical Authentication Bypass
• XML External Entities Injection
• SQL Injection
• Insecure Direct Object Reference for a critical function
P2 – High Vulnerabilities that affect the security of the platform including the processes it
supports
• Lateral authentication bypass
• Stored Cross-Site Scripting
• Cross-Site Request Forgery for a critical function
• Insecure Direct Object Reference for an important funtion • Internal Server-Side Request Forgery
P3 – Medium
Vulnerabilities that affect multiple users and require little or no user interaction to trigger
• Reflected Cross-Site Scripting with limited impact
• Cross-Site Request Forgery for an important fuction
• Insecure Direct Object Reference for an unimportant fuction • URL redirect
P4 – Low Vulnerabilities that affect singular users and require interaction or significant
prerequisites to trigger (MitM) to trigger
• Cross-Site Scripting with limited impact
• Cross-Site Request Forgery for an unimportant function • External Server-Side Request Forgery
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016 4 of 8

Flex Bounty Program Overview
A Flex is a novel approach to an application assessment or penetration test. Traditional penetration tests use only one or two researchers to test an entire application, while Flexes leverage a crowd of security researchers. This increases the probability of discovering esoteric issues that automated testing cannot find and that traditional vulnerability assessments may miss, in the same testing period.
The Flex for Instructure’s Canvas received submissions from 26 researchers in the following countries: Afghanistan, Brazil, Canada, India, Ireland, Morocco, Netherlands, Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, and the United States. Most of the researchers are based in India.
A total of 138 submissions were received, with 10 unique valid issues discovered. Bugcrowd identified 78 duplicate and 28 won’t fix submission(s), and removed 22 invalid submission(s).
The timeline below shows submissions received and validated by the Bugcrowd team:
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016
5 of 8

Bugcrowd ranks the technical priority of all confirmed findings on a scale from P1 (Critical) to P4 (Low). The results are shown to the right. The majority of submissions to the Instructure’s Canvas Flex were P4.
A comparison of Bugcrowd’s other flexes to the the Instructure’s Canvas Flex is shown below.
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016
6 of 8

All Valid Submissions
Title Reference Number
Priority Reward Retest
Stored XSS via Groups de61564ce42f9e9013c100f14 2 $6,000.00 Resolved 031da9392d5f60b081a886f0
c0ce605af56d7a0
Stored XSS via Outcomes 7391ca90e0fdf157143b12e0 c602aa14a03d21e6ec129f80
171ab9dcc1ed3284
2 $4,000.00 Resolved
Stored XSS in Quiz Question Bank as 1fd8f1db7cbd2a8d6076802b 2 $3,000.00 Resolved Teacher 40cb8993438cea6cdd93b7c2
b6440d8ab1ca7c19
Privilege escalation via IDOR : Change the behalf of another user All Notification Preferences
e31b26d4fe28dc894b4d7a11 6523f6b69387cc397cd63fff4 466ed38cbfd0b75
4 $500.00 Resolved
Content Spoofing (iframe Injection via f224e7c58b711457bb73610d 3 $200.00 Resolved HTML Editor) 7853a5c5f27e25cfc7e43de2b
220155a5dcb391e
User account information IDOR at 7d2e91c088b03ebc71ee3350 /users/ 4832ebe572ecd8f84bc827e9
e67cdffaf304e7ac
3 $200.00 Resolved
CSV Injection (Gradebook Export) 8944ad7281953f597cf6091b 4 $200.00 Resolved ecbeba36fbfda5dcddb74594
7c4ccfd14e172e1b
Course Page IDOR 90332ea307577359de9d50b 47e0b97a112f50c26b664641
6c4920017bbed518b
4 $200.00 Resolved
External Authentication Injection via d8989daebdedcacaf512bf13 4 $200.00 Unresolved HTML Editor 12bfe1d9cfd44979359a833a
58dda704a1012885
Window Opener Property Bug via HTML 3d253e7e68775ab8e17b8dfb Editor ca01d417fe5d59f1ca264f2ce
933fb5c5541c8e3
4 $200.00 Resolved
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016 7 of 8

Document History
• March 24, 2016 – Document Created
Bugcrowd Inc – 2016 8 of 8