Secure Coding mailing list archives

Fw: Secured Coding


From: "Greenarrow 1" <Greenarrow1 () msn com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:32:52 +0000

Sorry all I forgot to place the Sc-L addy when replying.

Regards,
George
Greenarrow1
InNetInvestigations-Forensics


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Greenarrow 1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dana Epp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [SC-L] Secured Coding


Hi Dana,

This is exactly what firewalls and anti virus programs do as they need to 
keep one foot ahead of the attacker.  If attacked, they must immediately 
create a defense against the attack, but this is where I see a fault in a 
lot of programming.  My thinking is who is really at fault the developer, 
IT security reviewer or both?  I have monitored 2 specific companies that 
are in the security fields.  When they create new programs one does fairly 
well while the other still stay with the programming of the past soft 
wares, just upgrading enough to fool the user.  In my business I have 
programs that can look at every piece of coding built within.  It 
surprises me at the total lack of revamping security in their upgrading of 
programs or producing new ones.

What I am getting at if other companies do as this, one does not wonder 
secured coding is dismal.  The one item I noticed that there is a high 
amount of greed within certain companies.  Get the product out no matter 
what and if enough buyers complain then we might patch it.  Naturally 
speed is essential in combating a attacker but why does one company use 
speed and creativity to its advantage while another one is so sloppy the 
patch is actually more damaging then the attack.  How do we stop this?  I 
am totally against suing companies that produce bad coding that results in 
damage to users systems because I feel no law can be written without 
creating a huge mitigation of cases no matter how minor.  Companies are 
afraid to share info because of infringements or copy write problems. 
This can be seen all over the internet.  As in the case one reader 
responded that I do not have time to peruse any security newsletters. 
Well, duh, are they that valuable or superior to any other developer that 
5, 10, or 15 minutes is going to destroy their day.  I only subscribe to 5 
security newsletters and when there is nothing that pertains or relates to 
anything I do I just delete it. But I have found some valuable info from 
posts while not in the language I use but still has affects upon what I 
do.

I am not in to heavy programming but I do create soft wares and scripts 
needed in computer forensics.  I also use Encase which in some cases I or 
my co-workers must create script to find what we are searching for.  One 
item is all our programs must be highly secured as we cannot leave any 
evidence that we were searching ones computer for criminal prosecution. 
My guidelines are that all programs created must be tested and then 
reviewed, then back to the developer for corrections, then retested, 
reviewed again then back to the developer.  The final version than is 
again tested by our CSO, which is forwarded to me and if it meets all 
security guidelines it is then used by all workers.  Yes this takes time 
but it saves lots of work and cuts cost of having to revamp the program if 
it is flawed.  When a company has to patch or upgrade because of secured 
coding it costs more then if they would have taken the time to secure it 
correctly in the first place. Companies do not see this as the objective 
is get the new product out.  If they would review the costs of patching 
then issuing the patch to everyone plus the man hours they would see this 
waste of monies.

I know I am raving on so will close with I Wish You a Very Happy 
Thanksgiving.

I am happy to see subscribers again communicating on Sc-L as it was laying 
dead in the water for a while.  Just maybe if we all put our heads 
together we might have a solution to secured coding.

Regards,
George
Greenarrow1
InNetInvestigations-Forensics




Current thread: