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

Abe abek1 at comcast.net
Fri Dec 17 19:09:28 EST 2010


Hi Vishal,

 

I put the old content back.

 

The chapter that I wrote is underneath for reference.

 

 

Regards,

Abe

 

From: Vishal Garg [mailto:vishalgrg at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 12:02 AM
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,

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/20101217/b343b065/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Owasp-guide mailing list