Welcome Guest. | Log In | Register | Membership Benefits
  • |   Email this page E-mail
  • |  Print Print
  • |   Bookmark and Share

State Of Application Security: Nearly 60 Percent Of Apps Fail First Security Test

Veracode app-testing data demonstrates that application security still has a ways to go

Mar 01, 2010 | 09:00 AM | 

By Kelly Jackson Higgins

SAN FRANCISCO -- RSA Conference 2010 -- Even with all of the emphasis on writing software with security in mind, most software applications remain riddled with security holes, according to a new report released today about the actual security quality of all types of software.

Around 58 percent of the applications tested by application security testing service provider Veracode in the past year-and-a-half failed to achieve a successful rating in their first round of testing. "The degree of failure to meet acceptable standards on first submission is astounding -- and this is coming from folks who care enough to submit their software to our [application security testing] services," says Roger Oberg, senior vice president of marketing for Veracode. "The implication here is that more than half of all applications are susceptible to the kinds of vulnerabilities we saw at Heartland, Google, DoD, and others -- these were all application-layer attacks."

The data for Veracode's State of Software Security Report comes from a combination of static, dynamic, and manual testing of all types of software across multiple programming languages -- everything from non-Web and Web applications to components and shared libraries. Veracode tests commercial, internally developed, open-source, and outsourced applications, all of which were represented in its findings.

And nearly 90 percent of internally developed applications contained vulnerabilities in the SANS Top 25 and OWASP Top 10 lists of most common programming errors and flaws in the first round of tests, Oberg says.

So is software getting more or less secure? Hard to say, Veracode says, since this is the first such report, and there's nothing to compare it to. "We don't know if it's getting better or worse, but it's pretty bad," Oberg says. "Despite all of the awareness about breaches ... this awareness doesn't translate into sufficient action. We hope this report is a call to action."

Around 60 percent of the software tested by Veracode was internally developed applications; 30 percent, commercial applications; 8 percent, open source; and 2 percent, outsourced. The software was 60 percent Web applications, and 40 percent non-Web, according to Veracode, and came from companies across 15 different industries.

Despite the relatively gloomy picture of developers still missing the mark initially on security, there were some bright spots in the report: Open-source software isn't as risky as you'd think, and financial services organizations and government agencies tend to have more secure applications from the get-go; more than half of their apps passed as acceptable in the first submission to testing, according to Veracode's report.

"The conventional wisdom is that open source is risky. But open source was no worse than commercial software upon first submission. That's encouraging," Oberg says. And it was the quickest to remediate any flaws: "It took about 30 days to remediate open-source software, and much longer for commercial and internal projects," he says.

Meanwhile, financial services firms and government agencies were second-best in terms of remediation: They took anywhere from one to two tries to fix their vulnerabilities. "This is good news. But there's a lot of room for improvement," Oberg says.

The data showed that third-party software is often a part of internally developed apps -- 30 percent of them were based on third-party apps.

The vulnerability with the highest total count was cross-site scripting (XSS), and was the third most prevalent flaw. "There's been intense focus on cross-site scripting, and there are lots of different libraries and utilities available to eliminate it, but it's still extremely prevalent," says Chris Eng, director of security research for Veracode. Eng says it's likely due to a lack of education on how to quell XSS, plus it's not uncommon to find 100 XSS bugs in one application. "Cross-site scripting adds up real quickly," he says.

Around 20 percent of the applications carried a SQL injection flaw, and most of those were Web applications. And 44 percent of the apps had one or more cryptographic flaw issue, Eng says. "Crypto issues are not generally well-understood by developers," he says.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.



Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

Dark Reading encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Dark Reading moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Dark Reading further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS



Vulnerability Management Reports

report How (and Why) Attackers Choose Their Targets
To protect company and customer data, we need to determine what makes it so vulnerable and appealing. We also need to understand how hackers operate, and what tools and processes they rely on. In this report, we explain how to ensure the best defense by thinking like an attacker and identifying the weakest link in your own corporate data chain.

report Security Pro's Guide to Patch Management
It's no longer sufficient to patch just Windows, Office and IE. With the massive array of applications now residing on enterprise PCs, and the proliferation of mobile and cloud-based applications, your business is far too vulnerable to exploitation unless you have a solid strategy for patch prioritization, deployment and quality assurance. Follow these steps to put your plan in place.

report In-House Malware Analysis: Why You Need It, How to Do It
Vulnerability management identifies and closes exploitable holes in your enterprise network. But some systems remain vulnerable, and traditional antivirus and perimeter defenses are proving less effective against sophisticated malware, targeted attacks and zero-day exploits. In this report, we show you how malware analysis, tied closely to incident response, is an essential complement to enterprise vulnerability management programs.

Other reports from the Vulnerability Management Tech Center:

Related Content

The Ponemon Institute 2012 State of the Endpoint
The 2012 State of the Endpoint study, sponsored by Lumension and conducted by Ponemon Institute, determines how effective organizations are in the protection of their endpoints and what they perceive are the biggest obstacles to reducing risk. The study is focused on four topics on the state of endpoint security: risk, productivity, resources and complexity.

The CISOs Guide to Measuring IT Security
Many organizations continue to blindly blaze into new technology territory without fully understanding the inherent IT risks. As a CISO, you must be able to facilitate business productivity without the risk. If you can accurately measure your security posture and communicate in terms of business risk as opposed to bits and bytes, you can effectively gain buy-in from key executives on important security initiatives. Learn the key steps to enhancing your security visibility so that you have a voice at the executive table.

Think Your Anti-Virus Software Is Working? Think Again
We've been so bombarded by computer viruses, worms, Trojan horses and other malware that we've become acclimated to their presence. We subscribe to an anti-virus (AV) offering and hope for the best. Trouble is, AV hasn't been keeping up. Studies show that even though most organizations use AV, more and more are succumbing to attacks. It's time to shift from the status quo to a new, more effective endpoint security approach, called intelligent whitelisting, which affords greater protection, productivity, and efficiency.

Unruly USB Devices Expose Networks to Malware
It's pretty easy for organizations to get so wrapped up about what goes out on USB drives that they forget to protect against what comes in their environments via USB. And with attacks inflicting increasingly greater damage following uncontrolled connection, it's time that organizations got serious about this threat. The key to USB security is balancing productivity with protection.

Reducing Local Admin Exposure Through Application Whitelisting
In today's Windows environment, users are accustomed to having local administrator privileges that allow them to download a variety of applications and potentially misconfigure their PCs. While standard wisdom may be to simply solve the problem by revoking local administrator rights on users' systems, the reality is that this may not be an option. Fortunately, there's hope - through application whitelisting.