Re: [EXT] RE: Glossary
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 2:32 PM Alec J Summers wrote: > Good afternoon! > > > > With the release of the Top25 and CWE v4.8, I wanted to pick this thread > up from where we got it a month or so ago. As a refresher, the User > Experience Working Group (UEWG) agreed on these definitions as updates to > what are currently in the CWE and CAPEC glossaries for these terms: > > > > *Vulnerability* > > *A flaw in a software, firmware, hardware, or service component resulting > from a weakness that can be exploited, causing a negative impact to the > confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an impacted component or > components * > > *Weakness* > > *A type of mistake made during the implementation, design, or other phases > of a product lifecycle that, under the right conditions, could contribute > to the introduction of vulnerabilities in a range of products made by > different vendors.* > > *Attack Pattern* > > *The common approach and attributes related to the exploitation of a known > weakness type, usually in cyber-enabled capabilities * > > > > One thing is that this “definitions harmonization” effort started as an > effort to align definitions across the CWE and CAPEC sites which don’t > agree on “weakness” and “attack pattern” definitions… surprising, no? > > > > CVE’s definition for ‘vulnerability’ was agreed upon after significant > community deliberation, and I am hesitant to open that up for further edit > at this time. > > > > For that reason, I propose CWE and CAPEC adopt the current CVE definition > for ‘vulnerability’, and work to harmonize the ‘weakness’ and ‘attack > pattern’ definitions on the sites. > > > >1. I believe that Jeremy’s definition for weakness focuses too much on >the absence of a safeguard/control versus a mistake/error. This has come up >in previous scoping conversations for CWE, where its not always the case >that the ‘absence of a mitigation’ warrants a new weakness type >2. I appreciate Alex’s set-theory type definition scheme and I think >the definitions mostly. For weakness, however, while the UEWG agrees on the >‘XXX that could become a vulnerability’, I think the added detail in the >table above is helpful. The connection between attack patterns and weakness >types is present in both our definitions as well. > > > > I think we could certainly debate these definitions till the proverbial > cows come home. I propose using the CWE- and CAPEC-research email listservs > for further community comment. I’d like to establish a timeline (say > Friday, July 29?) for accepting feedback, after which we can formally the > terms in the CWE and CAPEC glossaries. > > > > Are there any objections to this course of action? If not, I will send out > notes to the listservs by midweek. > No objections from me. I appreciate the discussion. > > > Cheers, > > Alec > > > > -- > > *Alec J. Summers* > > Center for Securing the Homeland (CSH) > > Cyber Security Engineer, Principal > > Group Lead, Cybersecurity Operations and Integration > > ** > > *MITRE - Solving Problems for a Safer World™* > > > > > > > > *From: *Fung, Jason M > *Date: *Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 1:33 PM > *To: *Hoole, Alexander , jw...@redhat.com > , Seifried, Kurt > *Cc: *Alec J Summers , CWE CAPEC Board < > cwe-capec-board-list@mitre.org> > *Subject: *RE: [EXT] RE: Glossary > > Love the definitions! > > > > The only part to nitpick is this phrase “*vulnerability* is a property of > …” I am not sure if vulnerability is commonly perceived as a “property”. > E.g., the following sentence does not read as smoothly if vulnerability is > replaced with property > > > > “In December of 2021, a new *vulnerability* (property) has been > identified within …” > > > > I associate vulnerability as an exploitable *bug* that takes advantage of > 1 or more weaknesses. > > > > - Jason > > > > *From:* Alexander Hoole > *Sent:* Friday, May 27, 2022 6:39 PM > *To:* Jeremy West ; Kurt Seifried > *Cc:* Alec J Summers ; CWE CAPEC Board < > cwe-capec-board-list@mitre.org> > *Subject:* [EXT] RE: Glossary > > > > Good afternoon/evening Everyone, > > > > Please consider the following points: > >1. I agree with Jason O. that the terms are a stepping stone to >understanding how these concepts play out in the real world. However, a >slightly different perspective is the following (without defining all of >the base terms): > 1. A *bug *is an instance of a *flaw/fault/error/defect* in the > design, development/implementation, or operation of a system. > 2. A *weaknesses* is a *bug* that *could* (i.e., may, or may not) > lead to a vulnerability. *Weakness types* define logical groupings > of bugs which share similar properties (e.g., Buffer Overflow). > 3. A *vulnerability* is a property of system requirements, design, > implementation, or operation that *can* be accidentally or > intentionally exploited (resulting
Re: [EXT] RE: Glossary
Good afternoon! With the release of the Top25 and CWE v4.8, I wanted to pick this thread up from where we got it a month or so ago. As a refresher, the User Experience Working Group (UEWG) agreed on these definitions as updates to what are currently in the CWE and CAPEC glossaries for these terms: Vulnerability A flaw in a software, firmware, hardware, or service component resulting from a weakness that can be exploited, causing a negative impact to the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an impacted component or components Weakness A type of mistake made during the implementation, design, or other phases of a product lifecycle that, under the right conditions, could contribute to the introduction of vulnerabilities in a range of products made by different vendors. Attack Pattern The common approach and attributes related to the exploitation of a known weakness type, usually in cyber-enabled capabilities One thing is that this “definitions harmonization” effort started as an effort to align definitions across the CWE and CAPEC sites which don’t agree on “weakness” and “attack pattern” definitions… surprising, no? CVE’s definition for ‘vulnerability’ was agreed upon after significant community deliberation, and I am hesitant to open that up for further edit at this time. For that reason, I propose CWE and CAPEC adopt the current CVE definition for ‘vulnerability’, and work to harmonize the ‘weakness’ and ‘attack pattern’ definitions on the sites. 1. I believe that Jeremy’s definition for weakness focuses too much on the absence of a safeguard/control versus a mistake/error. This has come up in previous scoping conversations for CWE, where its not always the case that the ‘absence of a mitigation’ warrants a new weakness type 2. I appreciate Alex’s set-theory type definition scheme and I think the definitions mostly. For weakness, however, while the UEWG agrees on the ‘XXX that could become a vulnerability’, I think the added detail in the table above is helpful. The connection between attack patterns and weakness types is present in both our definitions as well. I think we could certainly debate these definitions till the proverbial cows come home. I propose using the CWE- and CAPEC-research email listservs for further community comment. I’d like to establish a timeline (say Friday, July 29?) for accepting feedback, after which we can formally the terms in the CWE and CAPEC glossaries. Are there any objections to this course of action? If not, I will send out notes to the listservs by midweek. Cheers, Alec -- Alec J. Summers Center for Securing the Homeland (CSH) Cyber Security Engineer, Principal Group Lead, Cybersecurity Operations and Integration MITRE - Solving Problems for a Safer World™ From: Fung, Jason M Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 1:33 PM To: Hoole, Alexander , jw...@redhat.com , Seifried, Kurt Cc: Alec J Summers , CWE CAPEC Board Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Glossary Love the definitions! The only part to nitpick is this phrase “vulnerability is a property of …” I am not sure if vulnerability is commonly perceived as a “property”. E.g., the following sentence does not read as smoothly if vulnerability is replaced with property “In December of 2021, a new vulnerability (property) has been identified within …” I associate vulnerability as an exploitable bug that takes advantage of 1 or more weaknesses. - Jason From: Alexander Hoole Sent: Friday, May 27, 2022 6:39 PM To: Jeremy West ; Kurt Seifried Cc: Alec J Summers ; CWE CAPEC Board Subject: [EXT] RE: Glossary Good afternoon/evening Everyone, Please consider the following points: 1. I agree with Jason O. that the terms are a stepping stone to understanding how these concepts play out in the real world. However, a slightly different perspective is the following (without defining all of the base terms): * A bug is an instance of a flaw/fault/error/defect in the design, development/implementation, or operation of a system. * A weaknesses is a bug that could (i.e., may, or may not) lead to a vulnerability. Weakness types define logical groupings of bugs which share similar properties (e.g., Buffer Overflow). * A vulnerability is a property of system requirements, design, implementation, or operation that can be accidentally or intentionally exploited (resulting in a security failure). A vulnerability is made possible due to the presence of one or more underlying weaknesses. * An exploit successfully results in a security failure through one or more vulnerabilities which does exploit underlying weaknesses. * An attack is an attempt to exploit one or more vulnerabilities that could lead to an exploit. Attack patterns define logical groupings of attacks which share similar properties and approaches related to underlying weakness types. Note: the distinction between can and could is a
