[Owasp-leaders] HTML Security Annotations

Dinis Cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Wed Jan 4 14:12:52 UTC 2017


This is a brilliant idea, but I would make it a name-value pair (easier to
parse and more future proof)

On 4 Jan 2017 1:56 p.m., "psiinon" <psiinon at gmail.com> wrote:

Leaders,

All security tools suffer from false positives (FP’s), and good tools allow
these FPs to be flagged in the tool. SAST tools also typically allow the
source code to be annotated to prevent FPs from being flagged, eg the
@SuppressWarnings annotation in Java.

I've discussed this with Mozilla web developers and we have decided to
start using what I've dubbed 'HTML security annotations'.
The first one we will be using is to allow forms to be flagged as not
requiring (anti) CSRF tokens, eg

<form action="/my-handling-form-page" method="post" data-no-csrf>
    <div>
        <label for="search">Search:</label>
        <input type="text" id=”search" />
    </div>
</form>

The 'data-no-csrf' attribute is an indication that the developers know all
about CSRF tokens and have decided that this form doesnt require one.
Security tools _can_ choose to not flag such forms as being insecure
because they dont have a CSRF token. They can also make it easier for their
users to find all forms that so have such tokens:)
Theres no guarantee that the developers are right, so a sensible pentester
would not place too much faith in this attributes use.
However its an easy and effective way to reduce FPs in DAST tools and also
an easy way to indicate to bug bounty participants that they should only
report these forms if they are _really_ sure they can be usefully exploited.

There are other alternative solutions to this particular problem, including:

   1. Adding CSRF tokens to all forms whether they need it or not. That
   feels nasty to me and I'm not going to suggest it to our devs ;)
   2. Having tool specific configurations for flagging FPs. Many tools
   support this but personally I like the annotation approach that can be
   adopted by all tools

So thats the first one we're trying out, and I can see the potential for
more of them.

What do you think?

If everyone else hates this idea then we can keep as Mozilla specific.
However if there is broad support for this them maybe it could be mentioned
on the relevant pages of the OWASP wiki.
In any case I'll be adding the option to ignore forms flagged in this way
to ZAP ;)

All constructive feedback appreciated, including suggestions for other
annotations that could be useful.

Cheers,

Simon
-- 
OWASP ZAP <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/ZAP> Project leader

_______________________________________________
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/20170104/1a8daf5b/attachment.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list