Comments
Flying Naked: Why Most Web Apps Leave You Defenseless
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
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.
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. 
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?
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? 
<<   <   Page 2 / 2


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
Veterans Find New Roles in Enterprise Cybersecurity
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  11/12/2018
2018 on Track to Be One of the Worst Ever for Data Breaches
Jai Vijayan, Freelance writer,  11/12/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
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-2018-9071
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-16
Lenovo Chassis Management Module (CMM) prior to version 2.0.0 allows unauthenticated users to retrieve information related to the current authentication configuration settings. Exposed settings relate to password lengths, expiration, and lockout configuration.
CVE-2018-9073
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-16
Lenovo Chassis Management Module (CMM) prior to version 2.0.0 utilizes a hardcoded encryption key to protect certain secrets. Possession of the key can allow an attacker that has already compromised the server to decrypt these secrets.
CVE-2018-9085
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-16
A write protection lock bit was left unset after boot on an older generation of Lenovo and IBM System x servers, potentially allowing an attacker with administrator access to modify the subset of flash memory containing Intel Server Platform Services (SPS) and the system Flash Descriptors.
CVE-2018-9086
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-16
In some Lenovo ThinkServer-branded servers, a command injection vulnerability exists in the BMC firmware download command. This allows a privileged user to download and execute arbitrary code inside the BMC. This can only be exploited by authorized privileged users.
CVE-2018-19296
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-16
PHPMailer before 5.2.27 and 6.x before 6.0.6 is vulnerable to an object injection attack.