[Owasp-topten] RFC: Common numbering proposal # 3
Boberski, Michael [USA]
boberski_michael at bah.com
Tue Jan 12 13:46:11 EST 2010
I'm going to need some help with mappings as a next step.
From: Brad Causey [mailto:bradcausey at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:43 PM
To: mike.boberski at gmail.com
Cc: Bil Corry; Boberski, Michael [USA]; owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
Subject: Re: [Owasp-topten] RFC: Common numbering proposal # 3
Mike and others,
the latest convention up on the wiki is definitely a great one. I'm in. How can I help?
CISSP, MCSE, C|EH, CIFI, CGSP
Never underestimate the time, expense, and effort an opponent will expend to break a code. (Robert Morris)
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Mike Boberski <mike.boberski at gmail.com> wrote:
> You got it, stay tuned
> On 1/12/10, Bil Corry <bil at corry.biz> wrote:
>> Boberski, Michael [USA] wrote on 1/11/2010 6:14 AM:
>>> Please see http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Common_OWASP_Numbering for
>>> a next proposal, refined based on inputs provided so far.
>> An exercise we did with the Threat Classification numbering system
>> was to actually use the the various proposed numbering systems in a
>> sample document and see what they looked like when used. It didn't
>> take long to see that a simple numbering system worked best:
>> So my suggestion would be to find some sample documents where the
>> numbers would be used, and try plugging in a few variations and see
>> how they read/look.
>> - Bil
>> Owasp-topten mailing list
>> Owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
> Owasp-topten mailing list
> Owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
More information about the Owasp-topten