Asp.net Dynamic Controls

I think you are attacking it from the wrong angle by trying to encode all posted data.

Note that a "<" could also come from other outside sources, like a database field, a configuration, a file, a feed and so on.

Furthermore, "<" is not inherently dangerous. It's only dangerous in a specific context: when writing strings that haven't been encoded to HTML output (because of XSS).

In other contexts different sub-strings are dangerous, for example, if you write an user-provided URL into a link, the sub-string "javascript:" may be dangerous. The single quote character on the other hand is dangerous when interpolating strings in SQL queries, but perfectly safe if it is a part of a name submitted from a form or read from a database field.

The bottom line is: you can't filter random input for dangerous characters, because any character may be dangerous under the right circumstances. You should encode at the point where some specific characters may become dangerous because they cross into a different sub-language where they have special meaning. When you write a string to HTML, you should encode characters that have special meaning in HTML, using Server.HtmlEncode. If you pass a string to a dynamic SQL statement, you should encode different characters (or better, let the framework do it for you by using prepared statements or the like)..

When you are sure you HTML-encode everywhere you pass strings to HTML, then set ValidateRequest="false" in the <%@ Page ... %> directive in your .aspx file(s).

In .NET 4 you may need to do a little more. Sometimes it's necessary to also add <httpRuntime requestValidationMode="2.0" /> to web.config (reference).

I've always believed it was there more for the understanding that you can mix ASP.NET tags and HTML Tags, and HTML Tags have the option of either being runat="server" or not. It doesn't hurt anything to leave the tag in, and it causes a compiler error to take it out. The more things you imply about web language, the less easy it is for a budding programmer to come in and learn it. That's as good a reason as any to be verbose about tag attributes.

This conversation was had on Mike Schinkel's Blog between himself and Talbot Crowell of Microsoft National Services. The relevant information is below (first paragraph paraphrased due to grammatical errors in source):

[...] but the importance of <runat="server"> is more for consistency and extensibility.

If the developer has to mark some tags (viz. <asp: />) for the ASP.NET Engine to ignore, then there's also the potential issue of namespace collisions among tags and future enhancements. By requiring the <runat="server"> attribute, this is negated.

It continues:

If <runat=client> was required for all client-side tags, the parser would need to parse all tags and strip out the <runat=client> part.

He continues:

Currently, If my guess is correct, the parser simply ignores all text (tags or no tags) unless it is a tag with the runat=server attribute or a “<%” prefix or ssi “<!– #include… (...) Also, since ASP.NET is designed to allow separation of the web designers (foo.aspx) from the web developers (foo.aspx.vb), the web designers can use their own web designer tools to place HTML and client-side JavaScript without having to know about ASP.NET specific tags or attributes.