[Owasp-guide] Owasp-guide Digest, Vol 30, Issue 1

Vishal Garg vishalgrg at gmail.com
Wed Dec 15 03:01:48 EST 2010


Hi Abe,

Please see my comments inline below:

Regards
Vishal

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Abe <abek1 at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi Vishal,
>
>
>
> If the former content does not apply why put it in the chapter?
>

The project has been divided in two phases. Phase 1 is to recycle all *relevant
*content from the old version of the guide (to prevent reinventing the wheel
for what is already there) and Phase 2, to develop new content.

>
>
> I understand that it is a collaborative effort, and I am trying to
> collaborate, but copying a former chapter verbatim, when it does not apply,
> is borderline plagiarism.
>

I completely agree with you that we only want to recycle the content that is
still relevant. My only concern was that you deleting the work done by
someone else was not a good thing to do. If there are any concerns or if you
do not agree with something on the wiki, it is always good to discuss with
someone before making any changes to the wiki.

If you feel there is anything from the previous guide, which should not be
there, I would suggest, you discuss with your section lead and once you come
to a consensus, you can add the agreed on content to the wiki. All this
content will be reviewed during the review process and we (project leads and
content review team) would provide feedback to make relavant adjustments.

>
>
> I understand that the content from the previous guide which was replaced
> was important but I thought we were supposed to be pulling in content that
> applied to the new section.  In this case, I do not think that the
> Interpreter Injection chapter applies.  If you think the Interpreter
> Injection is suitable content for the output encoding chapter then I can
> move the current chapter content to a different location on the OWASP web
> site or just publish this content on a different security web site
> altogether.
>

Again I would say that we very much appreciate all your time and efforts.
For the time being, I would suggest that we leave the recycled content where
it was and you are more than welcome to add your content too. All this would
be reviewed during review process and any relevant adjustments would be made
at that time. At this stage, I would suggest that you team up with your
section lead and agree on what is the best course of action for this
section.

>
>
> I think coverage of the ASVS is important.  Strict adherence to the ASVS
> will turn the Guide into another version of the ASVS.
>

We are not trying to create another version of ASVS here. ASVS say what
needs to be done to secure an app while dev guide would say how it should be
done. The guide is much more detailed whereas ASVS only provides one liners
(headings for dev guide content).

>
>
> I don’t understand what you mean by “if everyone did this we would not be
> able to accomplish anything from this.”  If I revert back to what we had
> before we would not have anything new and we wouldn’t be accomplishing
> anything because we would only have Version 2.0 of the Guide.
>

>
> I am more than happy to put things in ASVS format but give us better
> direction.  Maybe a sample completed chapter of how you want the ASVS mapped
> to a coherent and logically flowing chapter.
>

ASVS has been developed as a standard that can be used to systematically
develop security controls within an application or to measure the
effectiveness of security controls. But this is a very high level document
that says what needs to be done. We (the OWASP Guides teams - Dev, Code
review and Testing ) are planning to align all three guides to the ASVS
standard so that the whole process of developing and testing web
applications can be formalised to the same standard.

Therefore the new structure of the guide has been aligned to the ASVS
standard, where each chapter of the guide has been mapped to each section of
the ASVS standard and each section within a chapter has been aligned to the
ASVS verification control requirement. Therefore all the general discussion
on a topic will go on the first page of each chapter and any specific
control recommendation would go within a specific control requirement. This
would include discussing the controls requirements, any worksheets or coding
samples.

I hope I have explained everything to my best, but still if you have any
doubts, please do not hesitate to contact.



>
> My concern is that when we revert to version 2.0, we won’t have a good idea
> of how to move forward.  Which will truly result in “not accomplishing
> anything”.
>
>
>
> When you suggest that I follow the ASVS structural guideline, I did cover
> the itemized topics of Output Encoding.  If there is something I missed I am
> more than willing to accommodate and add it but reverting back to the
> original content is akin to taking one step forward and two steps back.
>
>
>
> I also am curious which parts of the Guide 2.0 Interpreter Injection
> chapter would help a developer to do proper output encoding.  If you are
> worried about losing relevant content let me know exactly which content you
> think applies and I will gladly find a way to work it into the material.
>

>
> Regards,
>
> Abe
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Vishal Garg [mailto:vishalgrg at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, December 13, 2010 2:29 PM
> *To:* Abe
> *Cc:* Theo Van Niekerk; owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Owasp-guide] Owasp-guide Digest, Vol 30, Issue 1
>
>
>
> Hi Abe,
>
> I had looked at the Wiki over the weekend and analysed the changes made by
> you. I really like your enthusiasm in creating all the great content, but at
> the same time, we also have to understand that creating the guide is a
> collaborative effort where hard work from lot of volunteers is involved.
> Therefore we all need to follow some rules to respect each other's time and
> effort and to achieve meaningful results from everyone else's efforts.
>
> During my analysis, I found that you had replaced the old content with the
> new content of your own, which means that the work done by someone else has
> all been wasted. Also if everyone kept doing this, we would not be able to
> achieve anything from this effort. Therefore could you please go back and
> roll back all the changes you made to the wiki and retain all the old
> content. Also I would suggest you to follow the ASVS guidelines and
> structure and put your content at the appropriate place so that your efforts
> and hard work is also not wasted.
>
> Please let me know if you have any queries or doubts and I'll do my best to
> resolve it.
>
> Regards
> Vishal
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Abe <abek1 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Theo,
>
> When I came home today, I was having a rough day at work.  My gut instinct
> was to apologize as I tend to try and take responsibility and be held
> accountable (sometimes without thinking).
>
> Prior to submitting the chapter that I wrote, the OWASP Guide for
> OWASP-0600
> Output Encoding/Escaping contained the Interpreter Injection chapter copied
> verbatim from the OWASP Web Application Guide 2.0.
>
> I do not think any of the Interpreter Injection chapter is related to
> proper
> output encoding and still do not think it applies.  Replacing the current
> chapter with the Interpreter Injection chapter is not the right thing to
> do.
>
> As to following the ASVS. When writing, information should be presented in
> a
> clear, concise, and logical manner.  We are writing a book after all.  If
> you read the chapter that I wrote, all of the items under OWASP-0600 to
> OWASP-0610 Output Encoding/Escaping are covered.
>
> Again proper output encoding is something that I am still actively doing
> research on. I want to make sure that if I am wrong about anything, the
> reader can correct me and let me know where I made my mistake.  I am going
> to take out my email before we go GA.
>
> To be honest, I was a bit frustrated at the pace at which the guide and our
> chapter was moving, so I took the initiative to go ahead and write the
> chapter.
>
>
>
> "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."  --Thomas Paine
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Abe
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Theo Van Niekerk [mailto:theovn.list at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 11:52 PM
> To: Abe
>
> Cc: owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-guide] Owasp-guide Digest, Vol 30, Issue 1
>
> Hi Abe
>
> I'm afraid that you have jumped the gun.
>
> Vishal's schedule (see below your email) states to recycle old content -
> which I believe is still very valid - by the end of Jan 2011.
> Thereafter a collaborative approach will be followed to develop new
> content.
> It will then be reviewed and updated.
>
> Quite frankly I do not appreciate that you merrily jump in, remove the
> recycled content originating form the old guide, and replace it with yours.
> Also, what's with the "Good luck and email me (abraham.kang at owasp.org)
> with
> any questions."?
>
> Regarding the content you have created, I see it as valuable but it would
> have to be aligned with the ASVS. I think it is too complex for an
> introduction and should rather reside in a subsection of the future
> document.
>
> Can you please rollback to the previous version?
>
> Thanks
> Theo
>
>
>
> On 07 Dec 2010, at 20:02, Abe wrote:
>
> > Hi Vishal,
> >
> > Material from the previous version didn't really match so wrote a new
> > chapter outright.
> >
> > Output Encoding
> >
> > Regards,
> > Abe
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owasp-guide-bounces at lists.owasp.org
> > [mailto:owasp-guide-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of
> > owasp-guide-request at lists.owasp.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 9:00 AM
> > To: owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> > Subject: Owasp-guide Digest, Vol 30, Issue 1
> >
> > Send Owasp-guide mailing list submissions to
> >       owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >       https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-guide
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >       owasp-guide-request at lists.owasp.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >       owasp-guide-owner at lists.owasp.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Owasp-guide digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. [OWASP-Guide] Schedule for dev guide (Vishal Garg)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 21:57:08 +0000
> > From: Vishal Garg <vishalgrg at gmail.com>
> > Subject: [Owasp-guide] [OWASP-Guide] Schedule for dev guide
> > To: owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> > Message-ID:
> >       <AANLkTi=wV71qetsDEFz=5nY6ZSUnBAzcOezLJTthHJzE at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > After having a discussion with Anurag, we have come up with the following
> > schdule for the new dev guide. Could all section leads please provide an
> > update on how much work has already been done for the first phase of
> > recycling the content from the previous version of development guide and
> how
> > much of it is still pending, along with an outline of any new additions
> they
> > are planning to implement to their sections.
> >
> > Please note that the new development guide also needs to meet ASVS
> standard
> > and new OWASP numbering scheme. Therefore you need to ensure that you
> adhere
> > to these guidelines and make adjustments to your sections accordingly. If
> in
> > doubt, just get in touch with wither me or Anurag.
> >
> >  31/01/2011
> >
> > Recycling the old content from previous guide.
> >
> > 31/03/2010
> >
> > New content development for all sections
> >
> > 30/04/2011
> >
> > Content review and updates.
> >
> > 31/05/2011
> >
> > Finishing touches to the guide (eg. initial sections and indexes etc.)
> >
> > 01/06/2011
> >
> > Beta release. Get comments from public and make changes.
> >
> > 30/06/2011
> >
> > Final release (or possibly tie it with some event to make it more
> visible).
> >
> > We are also planning to have more frequest status meetings, possibly on a
> > weekly basis so that the progress on the development of guide can be
> > monitored more closely and we can have an open forum for discussions with
> > other team members. Anurag has suggested using Skype for weekly meetings.
> I
> > hope everyone would be comfortable with this. More details on this would
> > follow shortly.
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for thier contributions to the guide.
> >
> > Regards
> > Vishal
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL:
> >
>
> https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-guide/attachments/20101206/cead64bc/
> > attachment-0001.html
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Owasp-guide mailing list
> > Owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-guide
> >
> >
> > End of Owasp-guide Digest, Vol 30, Issue 1
> > ******************************************
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Owasp-guide mailing list
> > Owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-guide
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-guide mailing list
> Owasp-guide at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-guide
>
>
>
>
> --
> Vishal Garg
>
> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vishalgrg
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/vishalgrg
>



-- 
Vishal Garg

Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/vishalgrg
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/vishalgrg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-guide/attachments/20101215/fb46cc38/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Owasp-guide mailing list