[Owasp-leaders] [Owasp-topten] OT10 Risks?

Eoin Keary eoin.keary at owasp.org
Wed Sep 24 16:19:09 UTC 2014

It only words :)

It's more like "the risk of Xss" rather and simply "Xss" - not trying to be facetious here but Xss is not a risk, rather an exploit which can be leveraged via a known vulnerability/coding weakness/bug

Nice to see both you and Dave in Denver BTW.

Eoin Keary
Owasp Global Board
+353 87 977 2988

On 24 Sep 2014, at 14:31, Jeff Williams <jeff.williams at owasp.org> wrote:

> Jim, in your message you asked "What should it be?"  And to me there is no question that the T10 should identify a set of risks.  We need to start from the perspective of what will be the most useful to folks trying to get themselves secure.  And to me, they need a description of the risks to their enterprise.
> But what to call them? The risk of XSS being exploited is a good example. The attack is some form of parameter manipulation or injection, the weakness might be lack of input validation or proper encoding, the associated control is the validation or encoding engine, the technical impact is an authenticated user's browser takeover, and the business impact is most likely reputation damage or compliance violation.  We need a name for this risk.
> The obvious choice is to call this XSS.
> --Jeff
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>> Simone,
>> I am very grateful at how seriously you took my question and how deeply you answered it. This is super helpful. I'll get back to you off-list with commentary soon.
>> Thanks again and well done,
>> --
>> Jim Manico
>> @Manicode
>> (808) 652-3805
>> On Sep 24, 2014, at 3:31 AM, Simone Onofri <simone.onofri at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dear Jim,
>>> Literally speaking it is correct e.g. a SQL Injection is not a Risk as by definition, but in the latests editions of TOP 10 are getting into some analysis like Risk Analysis of most frequent "issues" on Web Application Security (I am using issues as a generic term) and I think with a little edits can became also "correct" by definition.
>>> Let me explain with two examples with the most generic defintion of Risk that can be taken from M_o_R / ISO 31000 and ISO 27000:
>>>  - M_o_R [1]: "An uncertain event or set of events that, should it occur, will have an effect on the achievement of objectives. A risk is measured by a combination of the probability of a perceived threat or opportunity occurring and the magnitude of its impact on objectives. " We can remap on our context is something like "An uncertain event that, should occur, will have an effect on the achievement of IT Security objectives". An important concept in this definition is that it is not bad. It depends. If the effect is positive we can call it an opportunity (but it is not the case of our TOP 10), if the effect is negative is it also called a threat in M_o_R.
>>>  - ISO 27000 [2]: "effect of uncertainty on objective" in which effect it is a deviation (positive or negative) and generating an impact but we are not sure that the event which actualise the risk. how it is possible to actualise a risk? if the asset (something that has a value for the organization) or a control (a measure we can use to modify the risk) has a vulnerability, which is a weakness that can be exploited by threats (is the potential cause) during an attack (the attempt to destroy, expose, alter, disable, steal or gain unauthorized access to or make unauthorized use of an asset) by someone or something.
>>> In particular in 27000 definition I see more concepts and analysis on latest TOP 10 version. Taking an example of Injection [3], with a specific example of a SQL Injection, as described:
>>> We have some assets (e.g. the application, the database, the data into database) and if we have some weaknesses ( read "Security Weaknesses" - e.g. no or poor input validation, poor written code with inline sql queries and not prepared statements), someone or something (read "Threat Agent"), causing a specific Impact (and I love the separation of Technical and Business impact in TOP 10).
>>> And the section "How Do I Prevent 'Injection'?" sounds like "which kind of Controls" I can use to protect.
>>> TOP 10 talks about the Analysis of most common Risks that can occur with the most frequent weaknesses/vulnerabilities, talking in ISO language.
>>> My two cents,
>>> Simone
>>> [1] https://www.exin.com/assets/exin/frameworks/126/glossaries/english_glossary_of_terms_mor_201404.pdf
>>> [2] http://standards.iso.org/ittf/licence.html
>>> [3] https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2013-A1-Injection
>>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>> Aloha Community and Leaders,
>>>> During the many hallway conversations had at AppSec USA in Denver,
>>>> AppSec nomenclature came up on a number of occasions. I heard several
>>>> folks claim that the "OWASP Top Ten •Risks•" was mis-named and that
>>>> the list is not really risks.
>>>> Is this a fair perspective? What should it be?
>>>> I am uncertain of this myself and am asking to trigger a intelligent
>>>> conversation; I in no way wish to harm the many volunteers who have
>>>> made the various OT10 lists happen.
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> Aloha,
>>>> --
>>>> Jim Manico
>>>> @Manicode
>>>> (808) 652-3805
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Owasp-topten mailing list
>>>> Owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-topten
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20140924/27120add/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list