Comments
Flying Naked: Why Most Web Apps Leave You Defenseless
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
3/28/2014 | 12:51:23 PM
Continuous application security approach
Curious to know how common -- or uncommon -- it is for organizations to take a "continuous security approach." What are some of the biggest challenges? Who within the Dark Reading community has considered or attempted such a strategy? 
RyanSepe
100%
0%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/29/2014 | 11:20:43 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
I know from being in the Healthcare Industry that application security is a large concern. My team has not been able to test app security continuously because for us there are regulations that make it increasingly difficult. This is why continuous network security is the main focal point, but as the article delineates, this does not have much effect on the app vulnerabilities.

For my previous statement regarding regulations making this difficult, take into account the following healthcare scenario that happens quite often. An FDA approved device can perform a medical task. This device needs to be used and functionality is the biggest proponent when creating these devices. This device has a software counterpart that not "speaks" to the device to extract data. The computer software can be locked down via LDAP/ other authentication methods etc but what about any software direclty on the device. Currently, many devices can be considered "smart" devices in which they have their own software directly on the device to handle and transmit data through many mediums. Many FDA devices cannot not handle multiple security safeguards and are initally barely locked down at launch making them increasingly harder to secure. Has anyone had a similar situation in their line of work and how have they handled this situation?
Randy Naramore
50%
50%
Randy Naramore,
User Rank: Ninja
3/31/2014 | 3:05:39 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
I work in the banking/finance industry and we test "all" web apps prior to being deployed, it is a necessity and any findings that are in the high or medium categories have to be fixed before going live. We test and code according to the OWASP secure coding practices which takes to time for developers to adhere to. This approach helps us.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
3/31/2014 | 3:09:48 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
Thanks, Randy. How long have you been folloowing these practices? What has been your biggest challenges and successes?
Randy Naramore
50%
50%
Randy Naramore,
User Rank: Ninja
3/31/2014 | 3:18:22 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
We have been doing this for the last 10 years at least, one challenge is to make sure developers use secure coding techniques it helps the security testers to develop a best practices approach to their whole web app program. This approach must have buy in from management because when vulnerabilities are found the decision must be made to not go live until remediation is complete. The business reputation depends on it.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
3/31/2014 | 3:25:10 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
thanks. I can see how important app security must be in the financial sector! How often in the last couple of years have you actually put a web app on the back burner until insecure coding is fixed. 
Randy Naramore
50%
50%
Randy Naramore,
User Rank: Ninja
3/31/2014 | 3:32:37 PM
Re: Continuous application security approach
Not really on the back burner but the decision has been made to push back "go live" date until app is fixed and retested. This makes all involved with deployment pay attention to details. 
WireHarborSec
50%
50%
WireHarborSec,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/31/2014 | 12:37:25 PM
Large-Scale AppSec Programs
In my previous role I managed the appsec team with a company who's portfolio spanned over 3K applications. The *only* way to scale appsec programs to this size is by using a continuous-type approach. Internal pen-testing teams cannot keep up. 

Add in agile development methodology and it gets even more chaotic. 
planetlevel
100%
0%
planetlevel,
User Rank: Author
4/1/2014 | 3:38:06 PM
Re: Large-Scale AppSec Programs
@wire - I'd love to find out more about how you scaled up your appsec program continuously.  I think there are many organizations that could benefit from your experiences.  Would you be willing to discuss with me for a few minutes? If so, please reach out at [email protected] and we can set something up.  I'm gathering data for a future blog.  Thanks --Jeff
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
4/1/2014 | 4:05:14 PM
Re: Large-Scale AppSec Programs
@wire and @planetlevel - The Dark Reading community would also be interested in hearing about your appsec scaling experience, so please share your experience on the message boards if you can!
planetlevel
100%
0%
planetlevel,
User Rank: Author
4/1/2014 | 4:10:18 PM
Re: Large-Scale AppSec Programs
All, you might find the talk I did at OWASP AppSecUSA this year interesting. It's called "AppSec at DevOps Speed and Portfolio Scale."  There are a lot more ideas about how to create a scalable, realtime, and most importantly CONTINUOUS appsec capability.  --Jeff
bamchenry
100%
0%
bamchenry,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/2/2014 | 11:48:22 AM
Re: Large-Scale AppSec Programs
I have seen the "continuous" approach to AppSec be addressed by the DevOps model for IT, by creating a format for security teams to have input into the software development lifecycle (SDLC). At a scale of hundreds, much less thousands, of web applications, the challenge is balancing security with manageability, usability, and development velocity. Tailoring your application security practice at an app-by-app level is only tenable if there are few apps, so there are going to be some compromises in the name of manageability, usability, and dev velocity.
lazydogtown
100%
0%
lazydogtown,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/6/2014 | 2:18:03 PM
> To state the obvious ... a decent waf would have blocked the morse-attack
> To state the obvious, there is no product on the planet that stops attacks in Morse code.

nope; a decent WAF like  naxsi would have blocked at least the morsecode-request with its core-ruleset

/know-it-all-mode off :D

 

yes, i know, a WAF is less than a plaster for insecure webapps and cannot protect from stupidity.

--ld
AnhT053
50%
50%
AnhT053,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/5/2014 | 11:18:07 PM
http://www.playkix.net/
I enjoyed your article .. thank you for allowing her to share comments


New Bluetooth Hack Affects Millions of Vehicles
Dark Reading Staff 11/16/2018
Understanding Evil Twin AP Attacks and How to Prevent Them
Ryan Orsi, Director of Product Management for Wi-Fi at WatchGuard Technologies,  11/14/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Online Malware and Threats: A Profile of Today's Security Posture
Online Malware and Threats: A Profile of Today's Security Posture
This report offers insight on how security professionals plan to invest in cybersecurity, and how they are prioritizing their resources. Find out what your peers have planned today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-17948
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
An open redirect vulnerability exists in the Access Manager Identity Provider prior to 4.4 SP3.
CVE-2018-1779
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
IBM API Connect 2018.1 through 2018.3.7 could allow an unauthenticated attacker to cause a denial of service due to not setting limits on JSON payload size. IBM X-Force ID: 148802.
CVE-2018-19367
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Portainer through 1.19.2 provides an API endpoint (/api/users/admin/check) to verify that the admin user is already created. This API endpoint will return 404 if admin was not created and 204 if it was already created. Attackers can set an admin password in the 404 case.
CVE-2018-19335
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Google Monorail before 2018-06-07 has a Cross-Site Search (XS-Search) vulnerability because CSV downloads are affected by CSRF, and calculations of download times (for requests with a crafted groupby value) can be used to obtain sensitive information about the content of bug reports.
CVE-2018-19334
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Google Monorail before 2018-05-04 has a Cross-Site Search (XS-Search) vulnerability because CSV downloads are affected by CSRF, and calculations of download times (for requests with an unsupported axis) can be used to obtain sensitive information about the content of bug reports.