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

Dinis Cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Thu Sep 25 00:18:15 UTC 2014


My view of the Owasp Top 10 is that it is an awareness document and a good
place to start on Application security (coding, exploiting or mitigating)

As this thread shows, there is a bigger problem in our industry which is
the definition of terms (and that is before others take what we/owasp
publishes and invent on top (like the ones that talk about Owasp top 10
compliance or certifications))

My only issue with the T10 is that it is too generic, and what I really
would like to give devs, is a version of that document for the technology
stack they are using.

For example the 'Owasp Top 10 for Node, Express, Jade, CrouchDB and
AngularJS' (the best case scenario would be a very small doc, since those
frameworks would handle by default a number of T10 items, like how
AngularJs and Jade can help a lot on XSS)
On 22 Sep 2014 18:36, "Neil Smithline" <neil.smithline at owasp.org> wrote:

> Some history...
>
> The 2004 and 2007 T10s are titled "The Ten Most Critical Web Application
> Security **Vulnerabilities**". The 2010 and 2013 are "The Ten Most
> Critical Web Application Security **Risks**" This name change was a major
> topic of discussion while developing the 2010 T10.
>
> My recollection, which admittedly is a bit fuzzy, is that the thought was
> that risks are what you train your staff to avoid. Improper defense against
> the risks leads to specific vulnerabilities and ultimately successful
> attacks. At the time of writing the 2010 T10, there was great debate about
> the meaning of vulnerabilities and risks. The problem wasn't that people
> didn't understand these terms. Quite the contrary, the problem was that
> nearly everyone had their own definitions of these terms.
>
> My suspicion is that the items in the 2013 T10 (I'm only interested in the
> newest T10) span terms such as risks, vulnerabilities, threats, attacks,
> etc... The definitions were unclear during the writing of the T10 and,
> based on this email thread, are still up for grabs. So we may never be able
> to categorize what is in the 2013 T10. During writing of the T10, we
> focused on our goal of making the T10 of utility to engineering
> organizations and didn't worry about having consensus about definitions.
>
> Going forward....
>
> I question whether we'll ever come up with consistent terms that we agree
> on. If we did come up with consistent terms, what would we do with them?
> Use them as a framework for future OWASP work? Other?
>
>
>
>
> Neil Smithline
> 408-634-5764
> http://www.neilsmithline.com
>
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I interpret it the same way.  Depends really on your
>> definition of a "system" (arguing topicality here Jim).  How about "an
>> assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole".
>> By that definition a system could be a web application, a database like
>> MySQL or Oracle, or an actual computer.  So, if a web application can be a
>> system, then, by definition, SQL Injection can be a vulnerability in that
>> system.  No?  And yes, it can also be an attack type.
>>
>> ~josh
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This is not true from Mitre's perspective. Per Mitre..:
>>>
>>> SQL injection is an attack type. Only a system can be vulnerable. So a
>>> vulnerability per Mitre (per my reading) is an actual weakness in a actual
>>> system, hence...
>>>
>>> CVE = actual issues in real systems and  (key letter V)
>>> CAPEC = abstract attack type definitions
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jim Manico
>>> @Manicode
>>> (808) 652-3805
>>>
>>> On Sep 22, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you want to get technical, XSS is a vulnerability.  Getting XSS'ed is
>>> exploitation of that vulnerability.  An example of a risk would be the
>>> compromise of customer data resulting from the exploitation of a XSS
>>> vulnerability.
>>>
>>> If anyone is interested in learning more about Risk (and SimpleRisk),
>>> I'm teaching a 1-day class on it at LASCON this year.
>>>
>>> ~josh
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Xss is not a risk :)  Getting XSS'ed is if you are vulnerable.
>>>>
>>>> It's a top 10 of most common vulns.
>>>> But if you actually did a top 10 (of common vulns)  the top 5 would be
>>>> SSL and security header related and make for slow reading. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>> Owasp Global Board
>>>> +353 87 977 2988
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 21 Sep 2014, at 17:04, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Risk != vuln
>>>> >
>>>> > Risk is defined as:
>>>> > "(Exposure to) the possibility of loss, injury, or other adverse or
>>>> unwelcome circumstance; a chance or situation involving such a possibility."
>>>> >
>>>> > The result of a weakness being leveraged and unwelcome outcomes.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Eoin Keary
>>>> > Owasp Global Board
>>>> > +353 87 977 2988
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On 21 Sep 2014, at 16:53, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>> T10 lists does not accurately
>>>> >> reflect the most dangerous "risks" or that it would be better to
>>>> name it
>>>> >> differently?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The commentary that I received was that the term "risk" did not
>>>> >> actually reflect the items on the lists. Folks have told me it should
>>>> >> be "vulnerabilities" or "attacks" or "weaknesses" and more.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm not sure what the right answer is here...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Aloha,
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Jim Manico
>>>> >> @Manicode
>>>> >> (808) 652-3805
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On Sep 21, 2014, at 4:50 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> T10 lists does not accurately
>>>> >>> reflect the most dangerous "risks" or that it would be better to
>>>> name it
>>>> >>> differently?
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>> >> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>> >> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Owasp-community mailing list
>>>> > Owasp-community at lists.owasp.org
>>>> > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-community
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-community mailing list
> Owasp-community at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20140925/26c04d57/attachment.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list