Weekly Edition
Return to the Security pageSponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
(Log in to post comments)
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 19, 2008 20:42 UTC (Mon) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link]
This certainly makes it look like PayPal is much more interested in appearing to be secure than actually being secure.
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 19, 2008 23:48 UTC (Mon) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link]
Actually, the article doesn't say anything about PayPal reaction to the issue.
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 20, 2008 11:56 UTC (Tue) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
I believe the poster you're responding to means that PayPal spent money buying an EV certificate (though by PayPal's standards it would be cheap) to re-assure users that they're secure, but they didn't put the effort into security-by-design that is a necessary first step before worrying about having the right kind of SSL certs. Thus no "response" is needed, PayPal's priorities, like Microsoft's ten years ago, are quite transparent and should warn security conscious people to stay miles away.
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 20, 2008 19:22 UTC (Tue) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
Why's that? When it comes down to it, technical security features are nowhere near as important as their security process. After all, as a user who cares what security features paypal uses? What matters is what they do if someone commits fraud or steals from your account. Just because paypal thinks that it is important to give the impression of security to their customers, does not mean that they will not have very good customer service policies! I am in no way implying that they do or don't have good customer service policies, simply that it really is unrelated to their technical security mechanisms.
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 21, 2008 10:07 UTC (Wed) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
I agree that the process is the correct unit of security, but I think it's a mistake to include all "customer service" in the security process per se. When your bank replaces money which was fraudulently taken from your account that's not part of a "securty process" it's just a customer retention measure or a legal obligation. If the bank is able to revert the fraudulent transfer then /that/ might be part of a security process, or if they're able to identify where the money went and alert a local subsidiary to call in the police, /that/ could be part of the security process. But just giving the customer money so he'll stop whining isn't security. PayPal's wider process is at fault here too, they've been telling customers that their EV cert means better security and that they can trust the PayPal web site, but it turns out that this wasn't actually true. Also, "customer service" responses to fraud aren't a free lunch. If your friends routinely fall for web-based PayPal fraud and have to recover the money through some sort of customer service process, you can be sure that PayPal is ensuring their fees cover that "cost of fraud". If the company is well run the executives /should/ realise that making the site secure would be cheaper than paying for escalating rates of fraud, but I'm not comfortable assuming that an effective monopoly like PayPal thinks that way.
PayPal XSS Vulnerability Undermines EV SSL Security (Netcraft)
Posted May 22, 2008 14:37 UTC (Thu) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link]
Thank you, that is exactly what I meant. They bought the EV cert and touted that it increased security, but didn't review their code to see if there were any XSS vulnerabilities in it (apparently).