When you piggyback a command through an input parameter and the output of the command is displayed in the web browser, it becomes easy to identify whether the application is vulnerable to a command injection flaw. The output may be in the form of an error or the actual result of the command that you tried to run. As a penetration tester, you would then modify and add additional commands, depending on the shell the application is using, and glean information from the application. When the output is displayed in a web browser, it is known as error-based or non-blind command injection.

In the other form of command injection, that is, blind command injection, the results of the commands that you inject are not displayed to the user and no error messages are returned. The attacker will have to rely on other ways to identify whether the command was indeed executed on the server. When the output of the command is displayed to the user, you can use any of the bash shell or Windows commands, such as ls, dir, ps, or tasklist, depending on the underlying OS. However, when testing for blind injection, you need to select your commands carefully. As an ethical hacker, the most reliable and safe way to identify the existence of injection flaws when the application does not display the results is with the ping command.

The attacker injects the ping command to send network packets to a machine under their control and views the results on that machine using a packet capture. This may prove to be useful in several ways:

• Since the ping command is similar in both Linux and Windows except for a few minor changes, the command is sure to run if the application is vulnerable to an injection flaw.
• By analyzing the response in the ping output, the attacker can also identify the underlying OS using the TTL values.
• The response in the ping output may also give the attacker some insight on the firewall and its rules, as the target environment is allowing ICMP packets through its firewall. This may prove to be useful in the later stages of exploitation, as the web server has a route to the attacker.
• The ping utility is usually not restricted; even if the application is running under a nonprivileged account, your chances of getting the command executed is guaranteed.
• The input buffer is often limited in size and can only accept a finite number of characters, for example, the input field for the username. The ping command, along with the IP addresses and some additional arguments, can easily be injected into these fields.