RE: WebAppSec Training Courses in UK

[Craig_Sullivan () Waitrose co uk]

Hmmm,

Methinks that security architect has possibly not had to work for a company
that is the recipient of these services.

> > Firstly there is little accountability. Its perceived as an art and not a
science and therefore you really have little confidence that all of the
things that should have been tested were<<

Yes, but we accept these limitations when engaging a security firm to cover
those areas where we may have limited experience or time.  People accepting
poor quality output from a security assessment are themselves to blame as
much as the 'market' is for foisting solutions that may have limited
applicability to reducing 'real risks' they are likely to encounter.


> > Someone once used a great analogy. If you're testing for cancer would you
take someone's temperature? <<

This is a poor analogy for security and risk asessment.  We don't test for
temperature but instead try to reduce the patients desire to smoke, drink
or otherwise ingest stuff that would increase the risk of cancer.  If they
have cancer, you are too late pal.....

> > Assess strategically not tactically. Asses how security is baked into the
development process and not just in a deployment scenario.<<

It would be wonderful if I had the chance to build security in from the
start of every development project.  Whilst continuing to educate
developers (who are often churning through new staff) about security best
practice, I still have to rely upon assessments to catch transgressions.

The usability industry is no stranger to this scenario;  In many cases,
clients ask usability consultants to find problems with an interface that
has *already been developed*.  The same situation exists with web
application security - in many cases, I'm asked to identify problems that
shouldn't have arisen in the first place.  Whinging about this doesn't
address the problems though - I have to educated developers but this
doesn't obviate the need to perform some level of app security testing,
often late in the development cycle (for late, read 1 week before release).

In the abscence of security conscious developers, we have to rely upon
education AND compliance testing during a project.  I personally think that
many of the services offered to 'assess' security from established
companies are pretty lame these days.  They cannot possibly understand the
background that the developers have, understand 'bad practice' that has
established itself within a company or provide assessments that leverage
internal knowledge of where vulnerabilities may lie.  We accept these
limitations of any assessments that may be provided and direct them
appropriately towards areas that we know are weak.  It isn't that we
suggest that you do only one or the other - there is a place for education
and a need for verification.

What I'm worried about is that many companies will seek to exploit app
vulnerabilities to clients without addressing the underlying problems with
the platforms and development approach.

Craig.

This is a poor analogy for security and risk asessment.  We don't test for
temperature but instead try to reduce the patients desire to smoke, drink
or otherwise in




                                                                                                                        
               
                      securityarchitec                                                                                  
               
                      t () hush com               To:      dan () idsec com, glyn.geoghegan () corsaire com             
                        
                                               cc:      webappsec () securityfocus com                                  
                  
                      03/12/02 19:08           Subject: RE: WebAppSec Training Courses in UK                            
               
                                                                                                                        
               
                                                                                                                        
               





With respect I think your description of security assessment training is
woefully inadequate in todays world. Penetration testing is a snapshot at
best and a time trial at worst. Having ran some teams for some well known
consulting companies in the past I know all to well the business model and
why its pushed so hard by them. Now working in corporate America I also see
why we the clients (yeah we as in my company and others at like minded user
groups who surprisingly do talk) are getting very frustrated with some
security consulting companies and training companies.

<rant>
Firstly there is little accountability. Its perceived as an art and not a
science and therefore you really have little confidence that all of the
things that should have been tested were. Secondly with 78% of attacks
being from insiders (see FBI reports) , looking at the hard crunchy outside
is of little value. Too many companies reports read  "High Vulnerability ?
Parameter tampering". After the sticker shock you read between the lines
and find out you can change the page color and they have made an incredible
leap of faith from that to saying you "may" be able to login in with
another users username. An indicator of parameter tampering in one place
can lead to it in another. It's the consulting fluff syndrome. You've all
heard it before I am sure. "These sessionID's don't look random". Well test
the randomness if you have a math degree! If not look for the source of
randomness and if /urandom is used then call it out.
</rant>

Someone once used a great analogy. If you're testing for cancer would you
take someone's temperature? Would you look at their eyeballs? Hell No! Get
them on the cat scan machine. Even if the eyeballs are dilated and you can
tell theyre ill, you still need to locate the problem (offending code) to
treat it.

One of the things I liked when I spoke to the OWASP testing people was how
they are going to cover what I think should be included in a web
application security testing methodology. In a structured meaningful test
you need to firstly sit down and understand the security requirements. How
can you ever say there is a problem unless you know the requirements and
how it should be? Secondly you need to understand the application
architecture. That's an assessment in itself! How are people using JNDI,
LDAP JMS <insert architecture component of choice here>. People are finally
realizing that XSS is easily cured with a proper architecture;-) You don't
fix it tactically, you fix it strategically.

Then there is a technical assessment which is where most people think the
pen test comes in. But think of this. My requirements have shown that
sessions timeout after 20 mins and my architecture review shows I use the
servlet container config (server.xml) to do it and the controller servlet
to enforce it. I can sit there with a perl script and make a request every
21 mins to each url (dumb in my opinion) or I can parse web.xml and
server.xml for the config. Ones a much more effective way to technically
test the requirements have been implemented IMHO. A pen test may have a
place in ensuring that stuffs functioning as it should be that's where it
belongs again IMHO, flamesOff(security, architect).

And then there's a security source code review, a web application security
management review (what happens when it goes down, who reviews logs, what
policy exists to manage the security of the application).

Web application security assessment is far more than a pen test. They are
prevalent because consulting companies can pull the wool of clients eyes
with buzz words and hacker speak, not to mention the business model that
works well for the consulting companies. If you pay 40K for a hit and run
that's good business. But if you fix the first hole and have to pay $40K
for the next then its not economical and the client will soon feel ripped
of.

And why does this relate to training? Well people IMHO need to be trained
that web application security assessment consists of many things not just
how to own a web server in 20 mins or how to test for XSS from the outside.
Assess strategically not tactically. Asses how security is baked into the
development process and not just in a deployment scenario.


On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 01:54:14 -0800 Glyn Geoghegan
<glyn.geoghegan () corsaire com> wrote:
> You also need to determine whether the training you want is
> 1/ Architecting secure applications
> 2/ Building secure applications
> 3/ Application Security Assessments (pentesting)
>
> Each has a very different target audience, and its own set of concerns.
>
>
> Secure application architecture can involve broad concepts (e.g.
> using
> proper input validation, building a tiered structure of least privilege)
> or
> specifics (e.g. secure .Net design).
>
> Building secure apps could start with pseudo code examples of important
> programming concepts and drill down into specific languages with
> their pros
> and cons.
>
> Application Security Assessments could take an application slant
> on more
> typical ethical hacking type courses.
>
> I believe @Stake, ISS and Defcom provide Application courses in
> the UK.
> http://www.atstake.com/services/education/courses.html
>
> Glyn.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Cuthbert [mailto:dan () idsec com]
> > Sent: 02 December 2002 21:57
> > To: phuc4 () hushmail com
> > Cc: webappsec () securityfocus com
> > Subject: Re: WebAppSec Training Courses in UK
> >
> >
> > i think the problem is finding a trainer that understands the
>
> > problems associated with web applications and security. also
> > the trainer that is providing the training would need to have
>
> > one helluvah understanding of security\building applications
> > and the whole process
> >
> > its a lovely idea... hmmm yeah i can see a owasp opportunity here
> >
> >
> >
> > * phuc4 () hushmail com (phuc4 () hushmail com) wrote:
> > > I have unsuccessfully been looking for any decent WebAppSec
>
> > training
> > > courses in the UK.
> > >
> > > It seems that courses are more on the networking side of things
> or
> > > when restricted to either specific technologies like J2EE
> > or .Net but
> > > I have yet to find a useful technology independent course
> > that takes
> > > in the wider picture as well as the grimey details.
> > >
> > > Any ideas?
> > >
> > > Maybe OWASP could start doing training courses?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get
> > > FREE encrypted email: https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2
> > >
> > > Big $$$ to be made with the HushMail Affiliate Program:
> > > https://www.hushmail.com/about.php?subloc=affiliate&l=427
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> CONFIDENTIALITY:  This e-mail and any files transmitted with it
> are
> confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient(s)
> only.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
> any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities
> other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.  If you have
> received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately
> and destroy the material whether stored on a computer or otherwise.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> DISCLAIMER:  Any views or opinions presented within this e-mail
> are
> solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
> of Corsaire Limited, unless otherwise specifically stated.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
>
> Corsaire Limited, 3 Tannery House, Tannery Lane, Send, Surrey, GU23
> 7EF
> Telephone: +44(0)1483-226000  Email:info () corsaire com



Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get
FREE encrypted email: https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2

Big $$$ to be made with the HushMail Affiliate Program:
 https://www.hushmail.com/about.php?subloc=affiliate&l=427






*********************************************************************

Notice:  This email is confidential and may contain
copyright material of the John Lewis Partnership.
If you are not the intended recipient, please
notify us immediately and delete all copies of this
message.  (Please note that it is your responsibility
to scan this message for viruses).


*********************************************************************

John Lewis plc                  Registered in England 233462
Registered office               171 Victoria Street London SW1E 5NN
      
Websites: http://www.johnlewis.com and http://www.waitrose.com