Clipboard Data Theft Now Optional With IE7

An anonymous reader writes "It's been known for a long time that Internet Explorer will happily allow any Web site to steal data that users have recently cut-and-pasted or copied into the Windows 'clipboard' data storage area. Well, now it looks like Microsoft has finally decided that this 'feature' was probably ill-advised, according to The Washington Post's Security Fix blog. IE7 throws up a warning asking whether users really want to let a site filch their clipboard data (Firefox, Opera and most other non-IE browsers forbid this behavior by default)."

Comments

not quite

[pchan-]

Firefox, Opera and most other non-IE browsers forbid this behavior by default

No, they don't forbid. They DON'T IMPLEMENT such a stupid idea. Microsoft had to go out of their way to ADD this "feature".

Re:not quite

[ruiner13]

I could be wrong, but I think I remember a setting in Firefox's about:config page that allows you to enable sites to access the clipboard. This may have been removed, but I think it was in there at least in FF 1.0. There is still something called clipboard.autocopy in there in FF 2.0.0.1, I don't recall if this is the same setting.

Re:not quite

[Thansal]

quick google tells us that clipboard.autocopy is a *nix only option that automaticly copies seleced text to the clipboard.

Re:not quite

[Intron]

I always cut-n-paste my login information when it has some minimum password length + funny character requirement + no echo. This makes it a lot more convenient to access my bank details from phish sites.

Re:not quite

[Binestar]

clipboard.autocopy is the setting to tell you if you want highlighted text to automagically be copied instead of doing it with the mouse/keyboard.

signed.applets.codebase_principal_support Gives scripts using codebase principals access advanced scripting capabilities. Basically, it allows signed applets out of the sandbox because they've promised to play nice. One of the main uses of this (according to the help page) is to allow IRC applications access to your clipboard.

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Firefox_:_FAQs_:_About:c onfig_Entries

Re:not quite

[uncommonlygood]

Don't know about the others, but firefox definitely does implement it, it's just off by default.

Re:not quite

[AchiIIe]

Not so fast. Have you tried using google spreadsheets? Try -- then try selecing something, right click and select "Copy", or "Paste"
- Whoah, you can't copy paste unless you manually do CTRL-V, or CTRL-X/C

I gave up on using word/openoffice I simply use writely for all my documents. I've had documents being edited with up to 50 people just fine.
Think twice before blindly bashing microsoft. There are some of us that want that "feature"

Re:not quite

[silentounce]

Actually, I wrote an intranet site that uses this feature. For firefox, I had to use a flash hack to make it work though, so technically with a default Firefox install you can still mess with the clipboard anyway. I agree for normal internet sites there is no need though.You can also enable it through firefox advanced parameters in about:config, but I don't have the link to that information at the moment. That's ok, give me your url and I'll stop by and drop it off.

Re:not quite

[Tim C]

They DON'T IMPLEMENT such a stupid idea.

Well, Firefox does, although it's off by default and requires a site to be whitelisted. Globally allowing silent access to the clipboard is shockingly bad, though, even if in the vast majority of cases the contents will be perfectly benign; it speaks volumes about the general attitude towards security.

Re:not quite

[AchiIIe]

Keep in mind, this is an Ajax app, the "GUI" does not know about the internal schema that google spreadsheets uses. I'm not talking about just copying some text, when using spreadsheets you may want to copy a whole row, or a table - formulas formatting & all the works so you can paste it in excel/openoffice/gnumeric In this case you Have to give access the the javascript application so that it can construct the correct representation and place it in the clipboard.

Re:not quite

[the_greywolf]

Do people actually USE Javascript in Opera?!

Yes. I do a significant amount of my testing in Opera 9 and Firefox, and am in fact developing a full-featured RTE based on designMode that currently works in IE, Firefox, Opera 9, and Safari 2.

It's not a bad browser for rendering CSS layouts, but its JS engine sucks and has always sucked. Basic AJAX ... simply fails with it to the point all the sites I work on actively sniff for Opera and remove Javascript beyond basic rollovers and form validation. This isn't a troll, as I still test CSS layouts with Opera to ensure templates look correct, but I doubt anyone uses it for its scripting capabilities!

It reads like a troll, since you clearly haven't done much testing with Opera 9. Their DOM implementation is complete through most of level 2, and is in line with Firefox 2. Their new designMode stuff is very complete, with behavior similar to Firefox's Midas. The XMLHTTPRequest stuff that everyone relies on so much now has been well-supported for a very long time.

The reason Opera doesn't work on so many "AJAXy" applications is, simply, because of the fact that developers with your mentality either do sniffing of the navigator object (which is Wrong, a Bad Thing, bad practise, and just plain idiotic) or are just too shortsighted to see that Opera is improving with every new release (version 8.0 notwithstanding).

I do the bulk of my Javascript testing now in Firefox, but use Opera 9 as a test environment to verify results. I test in IE only to see what other kinds of idiotic things its half-assed "DOM" implementation does wrong.

Re:not quite

[master_p]

But copy-paste works locally. When you copy-paste data between your documents, even on the web, javascript puts the data on the local clipboard. Remote apps should not be able to steel data from the local clipboard.

Re:not quite

[Binestar]

This is the default (and very useful) behavior in each of the linux install's I've ever done.

Being able to highlight something, then middle click to paste it somewhere is huge.

You still have a separate ctrl-c and ctrl-v functionality with a separate clipboard for your manual copy/paste, so you're not losing any functionality.

It's a *very* useful feature, and far from useless, I keep looking for something similiar for windows but can't find anything that works for me.

Probably?

[ifrag]

How is something like this only "probably ill-advised".
This is beyond complete stupidity. I probably can't even count the number of times I've had security sensitive stuff in the clipboard.

Re:Probably?

[AchiIIe]

Google spreadsheets? - try doing a copy paste between excel and GS. Google documents? - Would you not want to Select - right click - copy? Well, you might want to, but they overwrite the right click to include their own menu -- and guess what, now you can't

Re:Probably?

[jesser]

You're worried that if someone steals your laptop, they might be able to find your email address and spam you?

Re:Probably?

[pclminion]

You're worried that if someone steals your laptop, they might be able to find your email address and spam you?

First of all, I said email PASSWORD, not address. Somebody could steal my laptop and read my email and send email from my account. That would require them to be able to discern the password in all the millions of bytes of swap data, but I can imagine writing a program that could scan for candidates.

If my email password happened to be equal to my main account password (as can happen due to certain policies, but thankfully not in this case), that's quite a bit more serious. It makes me wonder what else might be lurking in the swap partition. When you type a password (like say, the root password for your main file server) into an application, you're really placing all your faith in that application to dispose of that data appropriately. So yeah, I'd be worried, especially in the context of a company, where it's easy to get your hands on a laptop that doesn't belong to you.

Could anyone explain..

[Squapper]

...what on earth where they thinking in the first place?

Can't Believe It

[endianx]

I had no idea that was possible. I would never have imagined they would do something so stupid, even Microsoft. What other "features" do they have that I don't know about? I fear to think.

Where's Clippy when you need him?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please PLEASE, let this warning be issued by Clippy. Such a stupid feature necessitates an equally stupid user interface.

"It looks like h4XX0R5.net would like to see what's on your clipboard."

/nostalgic for Clippy

I'm helping!

[PingSpike]

Internet Explorer:
Send personal data to unknown source? Click Ok to continue.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Why?

[Archangel Michael]

I mean why is it even "optional"? I cannot even think of a reason why ANY website would need access to my clipboard stuff, under any circumstances!

[new phishing scam]
Open text document, type in password, copy the password to clipboard, click this link, and we'll verify that your password matches the one in our file. Honest!

Re:Why?

[karmatic]

It's sometimes conveinent to be able to _put_ things in the clipboard. TinyURL uses this feature to automatically copy the generated link to the clipboard for pasting. I've also seen an IRC search engine that pre-copied the file transfer commands for you.

I still can't see a good reason to let the web page automatically get clipboard data. If you need it that badly, throw up a text box, and have the user hit paste.

Re:Why?

[enharmonix]

I mean why is it even "optional"? I cannot even think of a reason why ANY website would need access to my clipboard stuff, under any circumstances! http://docs.google.com/

Features vs. Security

[Kelson]

Microsoft designed IE with features, not features specifically for secure browsing

Microsoft (and other software companies, but MS gets the most attention for it) spent years working under the paradigm where making things more convenient and/or more powerful for the user was the most important thing you could do to get people to use and buy your product. (Not saying they succeeded at making things convenient, just that it was the goal.) Security was only rarely a concern, because for the most part an attacker (barring the occasional virus-infected floppy) needed physical access to a personal computer to mess with it.

Two things changed: personal computers are now vastly interconnected. Lots more people have them. Result? Bad guys can attack random machines on the other side of the planet using automated tools. Security is now a major priority.

Bolting security onto insecure-by-design products has had spotty success. In the last couple of years Microsoft has also tried to make more security-conscious designs...and they've paid for it in complaints when customers lose the convenience of, for example, always running with admin rights.

Re:Features vs. Security

[jimlintott]

While I pretty much agree with what you are saying I should point out that this is a web browser we are talking about. Ignorance of connected computers can't apply to a product that requires a connected machine to be useful.

Re:Features vs. Security

[Tim C]

Microsoft (and other software companies, but MS gets the most attention for it) spent years working under the paradigm where making things more convenient and/or more powerful for the user was the most important thing you could do to get people to use and buy your product.

Don't forget that that includes UNIX; from the preface to O'Reilly's "Practical Unix and Internet Security":

When the first version of this book appeared in 1991, many people thought that the words "UNIX security" were an oxymoron-two words that appeared to contradict each other, much like the words "jumbo shrimp" or "Congressional action." After all, the ease with which a UNIX guru could break into a system, seize control, and wreak havoc was legendary in the computer community. Some people couldn't even imagine that a computer running UNIX could be made secure.

The various flavours of UNIX have come a long, long way since 1991. So have MS; but they have had farther to go, started later and have not been travelling nearly as fast. A modern Windows PC in skilled/sensible hands is safe enough, but so many are in less than optimal hands...

Re:Features vs. Security

[a.d.trick]

Microsoft (and other software companies, but MS gets the most attention for it) spent years working under the paradigm where making things more convenient and/or more powerful for the user was the most important thing you could do to get people to use and buy your product.

I think it's more acurate to say "appear convenient and powerful". There's nothing convient or powerful about data lost or computers infected with worms and trojans.

Re:Features vs. Security

[Rob the Bold]

A modern Windows PC in skilled/sensible hands is safe enough, but so many are in less than optimal hands...

I don't disagree with you at all, but I'm compelled to add this:

The thing is, computers are ubiquitous -- and omnipresent -- these days, and the bulk of them are running MS Windows of some version. They're as common as stereos, but as touchy as a Stradivarius (or a crappy Strad copy). It's not really a valid assumption that all computer users are experts at using computers. They buy them to shop, do embroidery, type phone lists into spreadsheets, watch porn, keep in touch with relatives, etc. They don't want to be computer experts in order to do these things any more than I want to learn to play bass or drums or violin just to listen to some music.

So if Microsoft wants ordinary people to be able to continue using Windows PCs in a networked world, security has got to be easier. If the only secure computer is one that is managed by an IT Pro, then the potential market for personal computers (and PC operating systems) is only businesses. And that would be bad news for MS.

Re:Features vs. Security

[dgatwood]

Yes, and that worm and others like it are the primary reason that sendmail only makes up about half of all the mail servers out there (50-60%, depending on whose numbers you believe). You can't call that a security hole in UNIX any more than you can call an IIS security hole a flaw in Windows XP Pro.

Re:Features vs. Security

[Kelson]

It takes time for people -- and companies -- to adjust. I used the term paradigm deliberately. Even though Microsoft should have considered security more carefully when writing a network client, they were still operating under the paradigm established under the older, less-connected reality.

IE has been around for a decade. It took until people started massively taking advantage of the security flaws in Windows, IE, Outlook (Express) -- the outbreak of worms and viruses a few years ago -- for Microsoft to adjust to the fact that security was not just something to consider, but might possibly trump the old priorities.

Re:Features vs. Security

[complete loony]

Plus they also tried to turn IE into a platform for intranet applications that *require* more access to the machine than they should have from within a browser.

Re:Features vs. Security

[zeugma-amp]

Plus they also tried to turn IE into a platform for intranet applications that *require* more access to the machine than they should have from within a browser.

You're not kidding. The place where I work has many intranet applications that require IE use, and also require that you eliminate just about every security mechanism that IE has in order for them to work. Siebel is the biggest offender. You practically have to mount a "please hack me" sign on your workstation after you set up IE to make Siebel work.

Re:Features vs. Security

[Baricom]

(Note: These are serious questions.)

Why would one write a web application that works only in Internet Explorer? Doesn't that defeat the primary benefit of a web app - increased flexibility? Wouldn't it be more sane to use something like VB that will be more consistent at the expense of less portability?

It's the defaults, stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: half of MS's security problems are stupid defaults. You've been able to disable "allow paste from script" in IE for ages now, but it's ENABLED BY DEFAULT. Stupid, STUPID, STUPID!!!

Now, if they would just unhide extensions by default, and disable ActiveX by default except for pages on the trusted list (or just get rid of ActiveX totally, but I realize that'd be asking for too much), and get rid of a few other stupid defaults that I always uncheck on a new install, and we'd all be a lot happier.

Are both ways fixed?

[Target Drone]

If I read the articles correctly it seems there are 2 ways to access the clipboard data.

1. Via the javascript windows.clipboard object.
2. You embed an active-x spreadsheet in your page (which gets installed with office) then java script can call a method to paste the contents of the clipboard into a cell in the spreadsheet.

Anyone know if both methods are now fixed? The Washington Post article doesn't seem to say.

Re:Are both ways fixed?

[lostboy2]

Not "fixed" (as in removed), but apparently you can turn it off in IE4 through IE6.

Only a matter of time...

[Joebert]

... before someone ignores that little "This is a Phishing site you fucking moron !" indicator & clicks "ok" for this prompt.

Yes, it's possible to disable it completely through Internet Security Settings with a setting called "Programatic Clipboard Access".

There are many clipboards but this one is mine

[wumpus188]

yy
p

Once Again, "It Isn't a Bug, It Is a Feature!"

[EXTomar]

Once again Microsoft instead of recognizing a bug decides unplanned behavior is trying to treat it like a feature. Most other designers would call this a bug but but there is something else beyond the definition. What possibly earthly reason would there be for a server to request the content of client's clipboard?? I'm having an extremely hard time imagining a use case for such an event even with Ajax web applications.

So instead of fixing the bug, they treat it like a feature and ask for confirmation. This behavior by default should never be allowed in any context let alone a web/internet one. Asking for user confirmation on an action not allowed is silly and yet another scary dialog where the user won't bother reading or understanding the warning and just click "Yes" to dismiss and continue on their browsing.

I hate sounding negative when talking about Microsoft's technology but it is stances like this that make it so hard to avoid.

Re:Once Again, "It Isn't a Bug, It Is a Feature!"

[Abcd1234]

Once again Microsoft instead of recognizing a bug decides unplanned behavior is trying to treat it like a feature.

Actually, what's sad is that this *really was a feature*! A bug implies unintended behaviour. But clearly, they *meant* it to work this way.

Why not just fix it?

[Zarjay]

Why didn't Microsoft just fix the problem instead of adding a user confirmation prompt? Why is it important for IE to allow websites to get clipboard data from users?

That's a screwy way of fixing a security defect, if you ask me.

It seemed like a good idea at the time

[Somatic]

Public: What on earth would motivate you to implement such a thing?

MS: It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Public: In what way did it seem like a good idea?

MS: Well, maybe not a good idea, but an idea.

Public: So thinking was involved.

MS: Well, it was more like inspiration.

Public: ...

MS: They throw chairs at us. Help. Please.

Yay, new Firefox users!

[KingSkippus]

My god, I don't know how I've missed this one. It's the most scary thing I've seen in a long time. I like to think I'm pretty savvy, and I stay up with all of the latest scoop, but this is the first I've read about this gaping security hole.

For the past half hour, I've been showing people I work with this exploit (I'm sorry, I refuse to call it a "feature"), and everyone's been forwarding e-mails to their home account with two pieces of information: 1) The ScriptingMagic site URL to play with at home and show other people, and 2) the Firefox URL to install as soon as they get off today.

Thank god I've been using Firefox for a couple of years or so now. This is unbelievable. The thought that an IE window in my background could have been sitting there all along, quietly capturing and reporting everything I put in my clipboard, is just unbelievable.

example

[c00rdb]

here's a site that has a valid use for the paste part of the exploit. not sure about the retrieval part... (works on firefox too) www.2prong.com

Re:example

[fbjon]

That site works in Opera too, incidentally, but it's not an example of the security hole. It can only overwrite the content in the clipboard, not copy it back, so it's not a problem. Though perhaps a mild annoyance if you happen to store all your important data and private keyfiles in there.

Oh Big Whoop

[eno2001]

It's not like people are gonna be able to get anything valuable out of the cut and paste buffer. It's like what? 8k max? And how many people cut and paste valuable things like password, credit card numbers, user IDs, and the like anyway. The most any hacker will get would be part of someone's goofy school paper, a portion of an e-male, maybe at worst a URL (GASP!). This is so like a non-issue. As if...

[SLASHDOT CLIPBOARD IE7 CONTENT DUMP for User eno2001]:

eno2001 14m431337h4ck3r (419)555-2727
Look at this later: http://www.iheartfurries.com/

ub3rsm00vem4l3: So baby... my wife's out of town the whole weekend. Cum over and play?
SororityBabe6500000: Oh yeah! Let's party!

Books to read: How to Build a Nukyelar Bomb in Your Basement for Less than the cost of a Washing Machine, Trisexuals are People Too: A Study in Prejudice, How to Win an Election the Easy Way (Diebold Hacking)

Important investment info: Steve B said I should sell the Novell stock early next week. Remember to tell Feingold ASAP.

[END SLASHDOT IE7 CLIPBOARD CONTENT DUMP]

Only in Opera

[ZPWeeks]

I regularly hop between Firefox, IE7, and Opera. Call me indecisive. My university, like many, uses WebCT pretty extensively. Some places deliver quizzes, exams, and assignments solely through WebCT. The program uses this clipboard function somehow- I assume to watch for plagiarism. It's one of the very few ways I wouldn't object to this "feature". The only browser to ever notify me of WebCT looking at my clipboard was Opera. Probably for this reason, WebCT warns of "incompatibility" with opera, but still allows access. That's alright, since Opera easily masks itself as Firefox. I don't mind it in WebCT- but I would mind it on almost any other website.

Workaround for IE6

[edraven]

Change the security setting for "Allow paste operations via script" to "Prompt". Now it'll ask you every time a script interacts with the clipboard, as near as I can tell. For example, when you're pasting text into the form on Google Maps, it'll ask you if that's okay even though it's you the user requesting the paste operation. But pasting into the Post Comment form here on slashdot does not.

This has an interesting side effect on the "harmless" exploit page mentioned in the article, though. The script on that page apparently loops continuously, so every time you answer (whether yes or no) the dialog is presented again. The dialog takes precedence over other IE controls, and as near as I can tell there's no way out short of terminating the browser.

My IE7...

[sheepoo]

...did not prompt me!

Google docs and spreadsheets

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the reason they finally did this was to make it harder to use Google docs and spreadsheets--very annoying to get a prompt every time you copy/paste a cell in the sheet.

Security settings

[islanduniverse]

I don't know if this has been commented on already, but there is an option in the IE settings that controls this setting. Does no-one on /. ever go through application settings first? Under scripting: "Allow programmatic clipboard access" I think it is.

Unless this is something completely different... (Oh, and please fill in my survey for my dissertation! http://www.survey.flere.co.uk/ :) It's about online shopping and only takes less than 10 minutes! Thanks)

Ironic.

[lukateake]

Since the offending script stealing my clipboard will only be grabbing itself since I just came to the site to see how they implement clipboard access in JavaScript.

Security settings-wonderful if you know about them

[freeweed]

Does no-one on /. ever go through application settings first?

Yes.

Do we even know about, let alone go through all 5,000 braindead security settings that Windows seems to have these days? Hell no. After a while, you have to assume a vendor would do SOMETHING right. This one floored me completely. I thought a dozen open network ports on a home desktop OS was stupid, but this is beyond belief.

Things like this are why I moved to Linux. It's simply impossible to keep up with every idiotic setting that needs to be changed after a default Windows install.

kids today

[Clover_Kicker]

If people considered UNIX to be notoriously insecure in 1991, what did they consider to be secure? Surely not MS-DOS. What else was there to compare it to? VMS?

The various IBM mainframe OS choices?

OS/400?

There were a zillion wierd mini architectures/OS combos you could buy in 1991.

Re:Just curious here

[ozmanjusri]

What else was there to compare it to?

VMS, OS360.