[Owasp-leaders] OWASP Top 10 2012

Mark Curphey mark at curphey.com
Fri Oct 7 10:56:05 EDT 2011


I have often wondered (and clearly I have a horse in this race) if statistically broad adoption of a 90% solution is better than low adoption of a complete solution. We debated this on the STD project as a principle around encouraging tool adoption. Security philosophy anyone?

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 7, 2011, at 7:39 AM, "Dave Wichers" <dave.wichers at owasp.org> wrote:

> I agree with Venkatesh here. I actually think .NET is MORE secure than Java in many respects. However, I think because Microsoft actually tried to build some security into .NET in certain areas, like automatic XSS defenses, they shot themselves in the foot to some degree because they provided .Net developers with a false sense of security in that area. Since their anti-XSS mechanism wasn’t actually bullet proof, it actually ended up causing .NET apps to have MORE XSS vulns than Java apps on average. However, the .NET developers got this ‘benefit’ for free, i.e., they didn’t have to do anything to get to their level of XSS vulns, but the Java developers had to work really hard to actually get their XSS vuln count down because Java had no built in anti-XSS defenses. If you built the same App in both Java and .NET and the developers didn’t specifically try to stop XSS vulns, the .NET app would actually have far less XSS than the Java one.
> 
>  
> 
> I’m not a PHP expert so I can’t comment there.
> 
>  
> 
> Rather than having a ‘different’ Top 10 for each language, I think it WOULD be really cool to have a document like, How to address the OWASP Top 10 in Java/.NET/PHP, etc. Then the docs would be aligned with each other, rather than out of sync/different order/etc., which would be very confusing. However, if I was a developer for language X, and there was a Top 10 for that language, that would be very helpful for me, and not confusing since it covers the same stuff as the ‘standard’ Top 10.
> 
>  
> 
> What do you think about this variant on your idea?
> 
>  
> 
> -Dave
> 
>  
> 
> From: owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org [mailto:owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Venkatesh Jagannathan
> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 10:29 AM
> To: Erwin Geirnaert
> Cc: owasp-leaders at lists.owasp.org
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-leaders] OWASP Top 10 2012
> 
>  
> 
> Hi Erwin,
> 
>     I slightly disagree here. Whatever issue is present in .NET, the same can be replated very much in Java. When I give trainning on writing secure code, based on top 10, i provide samples on both .net & java way.
> 
> To me, creating a seperate material for java/.net would at some point in time end up in too many "issuelets" that are language specific and dilute the concept of OWASP top 10.
> 
>  
> 
> I think the way we should address this is: Provide examples in all languages would make more sense than creating one for each language :)
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> 
> ~Venki
> 
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Erwin Geirnaert <erwin.geirnaert at zionsecurity.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi list,
> 
>  
> 
> During some discussions this week with Java developers while giving a security training I got the following remark: "why are there so many ASP.NET/PHP issues in the OWASP Top 10, is Java more secure"?
> 
>  
> 
> So what I propose is to create a specific OWASP Top 10 for different technologies: Microsoft, Java, PHP and we can still have one global Top 10.
> 
> Ofcourse based on the CVE database but it will be more clear for the developers and I think that the OWASP Top 10 for Java will be very different than OWASP Top 10 for PHP.
> 
>  
> 
> Best regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Erwin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20111007/cb089843/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list