[Owasp-testing] [Owasp-topten] RFC: Common numbering proposal # 3
bradcausey at gmail.com
Wed Jan 13 17:26:57 EST 2010
And here is an example:
I did this in a bubble, ie, without anyone to bounce it off of.
CISSP, MCSE, C|EH, CIFI, CGSP
Never underestimate the time, expense, and effort an opponent will
expend to break a code. (Robert Morris)
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Boberski, Michael [USA]
<boberski_michael at bah.com> wrote:
> Here, you can kick the tires on this, expanding and collapsing the TOC tree control:
> Any other comments, keep 'em coming!
> Mike B.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Boberski [mailto:mike.boberski at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:22 AM
> To: Bil Corry; Boberski, Michael [USA]; owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-topten] RFC: Common numbering proposal # 3
> You got it, stay tuned
> On 1/12/10, Bil Corry <bil at corry.biz> wrote:
>> Boberski, Michael [USA] wrote on 1/11/2010 6:14 AM:
>>> Please see http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Common_OWASP_Numbering for
>>> a next proposal, refined based on inputs provided so far.
>> An exercise we did with the Threat Classification numbering system was
>> to actually use the the various proposed numbering systems in a sample
>> document and see what they looked like when used. It didn't take long
>> to see that a simple numbering system worked best:
>> So my suggestion would be to find some sample documents where the
>> numbers would be used, and try plugging in a few variations and see
>> how they read/look.
>> - Bil
>> Owasp-topten mailing list
>> Owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
> Owasp-topten mailing list
> Owasp-topten at lists.owasp.org
More information about the Owasp-testing