Internet Explorer Security Zone Manager

Posted on July 9th, 2007 by kushal

If you ever wanted to see a fantastic example of a bad UI, have a look at IE’s Securty Zone management dialog. (Accessed via Tools->Internet Options -> Security(tab), then click on a Security Zone (like Restricted sites) -> Sites button.

This is especially annoying if you use Spybot – Search & Destroy which shoves in ever increasing hoards of scum into this bottomless pit of doom.
That of course, is Spybot S & D’s job. Trouble is, the IE dialog wasn’t designed for this. (From the looks of things, the IE developers didn’t expect you to add any more than … say 10 sites to this list)
The dialog isn’t resizable, (Yes, no matter how long and how hard you hover your mouse at the bottom right hand corner, the resize icon just will not appear)
the scrolling area is frustratingly tiny.

See for yourself:

Internet Explorer Security Zone Manager

So if you happen to accidentally add a legitimate site in this list, good luck pulling it out of there – you’re doomed to scrolling around the thing for days.
Thats where a tool like ZonedOut from the boys at FunkyToad comes in really handy. Its nothing really fancy, just useful. Not only is it easier to use than IE’s own dialog, it also comes with a search function.

Incidentally googling for such a tool seems to bring you to some degenerate crowd who actually charge for the same sort of tool.

The Perils of XPath Expressions (Specifically, Escaping Quotes)

Posted on June 28th, 2007 by kushal

The other day, I was grappling with a particularly irritating problem with XPaths. I was using SelectSingleNode to dig some info out of an XML document.

The problem:

… was simple. Escaping a single/double quote in an XPath expression such as this:

string myXPathExpression =
    "books/book[@publisher = 'publisher name here']";

If the publisher name were to have an apostrophe in it (e.g. O' Reilly) I’d be in trouble.

Lazy Hack #1:

The simple, straightforward solution would be the following:

string myXPathExpression =
    "books/book[@publisher = \"O'Reilly\"]";

… i.e. enclose the PredicateExpr in double quotes instead of single quotes.
But of course as is often the case, words like "simple" and "straightforward" are merely a replacement for words like "short-sighted".

The problem with that solution of course, was what if that blasted publisher name had a double quote in it?
Would I go back to enclosing it in single quotes? What if it had both? What if I simply didn’t know, and I was building up the string like this:

string myXPathExpression =
    "books/book[@publisher = '" + publisherName + "']";

.. assuming publisherName was a user-entered string I had no control over. (which was in fact, the case)

Lazy Hack #2:

I could of course, wimp out and prevent the user from entering double or single quotes (or worse, both). I could even rationalise it by pretending this was really because I was thinking of the "bigger picture" and that resources and time aren’t really worth fixing this issue. But I decided not to. Mostly because its irritating enough listening to pseudo-managerial-cop-out-speak when it isn’t coming from me; I really didn’t need to add to it.

Wrong Solution Lazy Hack #3:

My first thought was that I should replace single quotes with ' (or its hex equivalent ') and double quotes with " (or ") according to the XML 1.0 markup rules. That should have worked right?

But apparently that isnt the case. Even though the guys at W3C recommend it.

It turns out that I didn’t need to escape any of the standard XML entities1 in my XPath query at all. (Even though I positively do need to do this in my XML markup)

So not only is this a valid XPath expression:

string myXPathExpression =
    "tvshows/tvshow[@name = 'Starsky & Hutch']";
    //no need to use & in place of ampersand.

… but also this would not return the result I would expect:

string myXPathExpression =
    "tvshows/tvshow[@name = 'Starsky & Hutch']";
    // this will *not* return the tvshow node with an attribute
    //called "Starsy & Hutch"


It turned out the only solution was to use the concat function defined in the W3C XPath recommendation.

string myXPathExpression = "books/book[@publisher = " +
   "concat('Single', "'", 'quote. Double', '"', 'quote.')]";
   //looks for a publisher called Single'quote. Double"quote

i.e. break up my search string around single and double quotes, and concatenate all the bits using this concat function (it takes a variable number of string arguments) – thereby enclosing the single quotes in double quotes, and the double quotes in single quotes.

Pretty crazy, huh? BTW, this is true in .Net, Java2, Mozilla’s implementation of XPaths, as well as Internet Explorer’s. (In IE, you would be using the MSXML parser. More on this below).

So, since I was building up a string like this:

string myXPathExpression =
    "books/book[@publisher = '" + publisherNameHere + "']";

I had no alternative but to write a method that would generate the required concat function call for me. i.e.:

string myXPathExpression = "books/book" +
  "[@publisher = " + GenerateConcatForXPath(publisherNameHere) + "]";

Here is the method written in C#.

//you may want to use constants like HtmlTextWriter.SingleQuoteChar and
//HtmlTextWriter.DoubleQuoteChar intead of strings like "'" and "\""
private static string GenerateConcatForXPath(string a_xPathQueryString)
    string returnString = string.Empty;
    string searchString = a_xPathQueryString;
    char[] quoteChars = new char[] { '\'', '"' };
    int quotePos = searchString.IndexOfAny(quoteChars);
    if (quotePos == -1)
        returnString = "'" + searchString + "'";
        returnString = "concat(";
        while (quotePos != -1)
            string subString = searchString.Substring(0, quotePos);
            returnString += "'" + subString + "', ";
            if (searchString.Substring(quotePos, 1) == "'")
                returnString += "\"'\", ";
                //must be a double quote
                returnString += "'\"', ";
            searchString = searchString.Substring(quotePos + 1,
                             searchString.Length - quotePos - 1);
            quotePos = searchString.IndexOfAny(quoteChars);
        returnString += "'" + searchString + "')";
    return returnString;

The Exception (there’s always one):

Microsoft’s MSXML parser (the COM implementation, not the .Net one – and they are different) is still widely in use. Mostly in Visual Studio 6 based apps (like VB6), on apps with client-side XML processing done on IE, and those glorified batch files written in Windows Scripting Host. Also, there are probably more than a few .Net apps using MSXML via the COM Interop Services.

This problem of escaping quotes exists for MSXML too of course, and the solution is the same – but only for MSXML4 and later. For versions 3 and before, you would have to escape single and double quotes with C-style backslashes.
This naturally also means that you would have to escape backslashes themselves with two backslashes – something you need to be aware of if you are porting your application from MSXML 1, 2 or 3 to anything later than that.

Sigh! Sometimes I miss the old XPath-free days when shoot’em ups were still innovative, they actually ran on two megabytes of RAM, and no-one had heard of Paris Hilton.

1 Predefined XML Entities: &, <, >, " and '
2 XPaths in Java: I tested it using Apache’s Xalan XSLT Processor. And using the compile method which of course adheres to Sun’s JAXP specification.

Posted in C#, Java, XML | 22 Comments »

The Null Coalescing Operator (Or how to make Default values sound frightening)

Posted on June 15th, 2007 by kushal


C# 2.0 introduced a little known, and somewhat useful new operator called the Null Coalescing Operator.

Its like the ternary conditional operator, except less powerful (but admittedly a little neater to look at).
Here’s an example of coaless coolesc that new feature:

//assuming formValue is of type string
string nickName = formValue ?? "Dr. Zoidberg";

… which is the same as this:

string nickName = 
        (formValue == null) ? "Dr. Zoidberg" : formValue;

Its just easiest to think of it as the ‘default’ operator. i.e.
nickName is being set to formValue, but with a default.

Note however, that if you try to change this code:

string nickName = 
        string.IsNullOrEmpty(formValue) ? "Dr. Zoidberg" : formValue;

… to sprinkle some freshly-made coalescing goodness, you could be introducing a subtle bug. (Think empty string)


I’ve never quite understood why people have to come up with the most intimidatory name possible for a simple feature.
Maybe the C# developers wanted to stress similarity with the ANSI SQL function which pretty much does the same thing:

SELECT COALESCE(@nickaname, 'Dr. Zoidberg')

… in which case I can somewhat understand. After all, the SQL guys had to spend their time dealing mostly with simplistic sounding keywords like SELECT, CREATE, UPDATE etc … and some guy probably just snapped. Lawyers have their indictments, plaintiffs, subpoenas and what-not. Doctors regularly get to say words like haemoglobin, pericardium and streptokinase. So someone must have looked up the dictionary and come up a random word.


Interestingly enough, even though this feature isn’t supported by Java (as of Java 5), Javascript has long supported this. Of course Javascript really has nothing to do with Java. But its hard not to form an association in one’s head.
Anyway, here’s the equivalent in Javascript:

var nickName = (formValue || "Dr Zoidberg");

While on the topic of Javascript and null coalescence, beware though. Don’t get confused with this Javascript statement:

var returnValue = (myObject && myObject.myProperty);

…which is called the “Guard” operator apparently. You would use this when you really want to return myObject.myProperty, but you aren’t sure if myObject is null or not, and want to avoid a null pointer error1. Kinda hacky, I know.

If you’re wondering how come all this doesn’t conflict with Javacript’s implementation of the logical OR and AND operators, its because they dont necessarily return booleans and Javascript evaluates all objects, non-empty strings and non-zero numbers to true. So both the “guard” and “default” operators are really Javascript’s own peculiar implementation of logical AND and OR operators.
Javascript often strikes me as the Ferris Bueller of programming languages. Not always taken seriously, but still surprisingly inventive and most of all – very, very annoying.

1: The specific error message varies from browser to browser. In IE this would show up as “myProperty is null or not an object”, in Mozilla based browsers the error message would be “myObject has no properties” (which makes a little more sense, no?)

Posted in C#, Javascript | 6 Comments »

Are Pro Web Developers somewhat under-informed?

Posted on June 11th, 2007 by kushal

I was over at a Microsoft User Group conference the other day and was pretty amazed at one of the presentations. It was entitled “Hacking websites for fun and profit”
It was about (what seemed to me to be) pretty basic stuff. Things like:

  • Don’t rely on javascript based client side validation.
  • Don’t rely on HTML based client side validation (things like the MAXLENGTH attribute on texboxes)
  • Avoid XSS attacks by HTMLEncoding your data when displaying them – especially if its user-entered.
  • Escape data that you will be concatenating in an SQL statement to avoid SQL injection attacks.
  • When it comes to data that is your own (e.g. price of a certain item in a shopping cart app) as opposed to data entered by the user (e.g. how many items the user wished to buy) don’t rely on form based or Querystring based data as these can be changed just by using a tool like Fiddler, or just saving the HTML locally and editing it.
  • Don’t rely on HTTP headers like Referer (sic) for any kind of validation.

I was hoping for somewhat more from the presentation. In fact, it would be fair to say I was quite disappointed. Almost Everything he said seemed pretty basic to me. I mean anyone other than an absolute script/html kiddie should be making any of those mistakes.
Are paid professionals actually stupid enough to make such basic mistakes that it would warrant a whole presentation just on these fundamentals? (He was saying how he’s been making several presentations on the same subject all over the place. And this was a conference arranged for professionals .. certainly not a bunch of n00bs.) Most of the audience seemed impressed. Well certainly not as unimpressed as I was.
So what’s going on?

I don’t mean to take anything away from the presenter Barry Dorrans, though.

BTW, if that sounds like I was saying that the presentation was ineffectual or a waste of time or something like that, its mostly because my writing skills are about as well developed as Craig Newmark’s aesthetic talent.
I was merely amazed that so many folks exist who make their living writing applications for the web, and yet don’t know this stuff. But, because that is a sad fact, (and also because not everyone is amassing a vast fortune by writing web apps … yet) people ought to be paying more attention to what guys like Barry have to say.

Posted in Security | 5 Comments »