Re: [SC-L] Bumper sticker definition of secure software

2006-07-18 Thread Paolo Perego
Hi list, I'll introduce myself with a claim:
Software is like Titanic, pleople claim it was unsinkable. Securing is providing it power steering 

thesp0nge
On 7/18/06, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Rajeev Gopalakrishna wrote: Reliability is concerned only with accidental failures while security has
 to consider malicious attacks as well. The difference is in the intent of the software user: benign or malicious. And for a bumper sticker, here is one for the pessimists: Secure Software is a Myth
 and another version for the skeptics: Is Secure Software a Myth? :)Again, this would speak only to a very small percentage of thepopulation. You me, maybe 10K people around the world if we are generous.
 -rajeev On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Peter G. Neumann wrote:  You suggest:   Secure software is software that remains dependable despite efforts to
  compromise its dependability.   You need a bigger-picture view that encompasses trustworthiness  and assurance.   Dependable systems are systems that remain dependable despite
  would-be compromises to their dependability.   Trustworthy systems are systems that are worthy of being trusted  to satisfy their requirements (for security, reliability, survivability,
  safety, or whatever).   Security is generally too narrow by itself, because a system that is  not reliable is not likely to be secure, especially when in  unreliability mode!
   The principle of Keep It Simple is inherently unworkable with respect to  security.Security is inherently complex.Trustworthiness is broader and  even more complex.But if you don't think about trustworthiness more
  broadly, what you get is not likely to be very secure.   Forget the bumper sticker approach.   ___  Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
  SC-L@securecoding.org  List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
  List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php  ___ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
 SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - 
http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php___Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
SC-L@securecoding.orgList information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-lList charter available at - 
http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php-- $cd /pub$more beerAngeL core developer: http://www.sikurezza.org/angel
 
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php


Re: [SC-L] Perspectives on Code Scanning

2007-06-10 Thread Paolo Perego
James, and all list please apologies for my bad english usage. Looking
at your reply I understood I espressed my thoghuts playing bad with
words.

By saying that vendors has to follow developer licensing, I intended
that in my opinion is good that vendors still build tool to aid
developers not only executives as some mail in this thread would
suggest.

I do agree that tool designed to assist developers in writing secure
code has to be free and open. I'm writing one of this tool, indeed
it's a framework to build such tools but it's not an important
different in this topic.

I think that an open source approach is the winning here not just for
saving money in buying tools but for the widespread knowledge shared
among developers and security experts writing the tool itself.

Sorry for my firmer mail that doesn't show correctly what is my opinion.

The framework for code review tool I'm writing is an owasp project,
hosted at sourceforge: http://orizon.sourceforge.net

Ciao ciao
thesp0nge


On 6/8/07, McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 In a previous thread someone appropriately commented that perspectives in 
 this space differ depending upon whether you are a software vendor, 
 government customer or enterprise. I do not disagree that developers need to 
 know how to fix their code. What I am saying is that tools to assist 
 developers in writing better could should be free.

 Your quote *imho* vendor has to follow developer licensing is where I think 
 it will harm the goals of secure coding at large. Consider the trend within 
 the industry that tools for software development are essentially becoming 
 free. No one pays for IDEs (rare exceptions) when things like Eclipse and 
 Visual Studio have free versions.

 Enterprise folks however will pay lots of money for tools in the auditing 
 space that help them to quantify risk. The ability to scan large multiple 
 code bases is a different product/problem than scanning while writing code in 
 an IDE. I am saying that more money could be had if folks focus on the first 
 and not the later. Vendors who get it twisted by focusing on the number of 
 developers are dillusional and should ask themselves why aren't but a select 
 few of any enterprise pervasively deploying tools to developers.

 Give away the developer tools in the same way Microsoft does and you will 
 accelerate your potential sales from the bottom up. Not all sales within 
 places are driven top down...

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paolo Perego
 Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 5:40 AM
 To: McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT)
 Cc: Secure Coding
 Subject: Re: [SC-L] Perspectives on Code Scanning

 Hi there, I found this thread very interesting.
 It's true that developers are the ones who remediate to code
 insecurity and executives care about how much effort has to be spent
 over closing branches. Indeed I think the two categories needs a tool
 approaching the same problem (tell if a code follows security best
 practices or not) showing results in 2 different languages.

 Developers need how to know how to fix their code. Executives need to
 know how much these fixes cost, who will attend them and in how many
 time fixes will be committed.

 *imho* vendor has to follow developer licensing... since developer do
 knows ho to write code but he has to be helped in writing it in a
 secure way.

 Safe coding is a concern for both developers than executives.
 My 2 euro cents

 Ciao ciao
 thesp0nge
 --
 Owasp Orizon leader
 orizon.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
 List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
 List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
 SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
 as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
 ___


 *
 This communication, including attachments, is
 for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary,
 confidential and/or privileged information.  If you are not the intended
 recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is
 strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify
 the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and
 destroy all copies.
 *


 ___
 Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
 List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
 List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
 SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
 as a free, non-commercial service

[SC-L] Code review pool

2007-11-05 Thread Paolo Perego
Hi guys, trying to improve Owasp Orizon project in a better way, I
released a poll over my blog here:
http://thesp0nge.livejournal.com/5687.html

It would be great having your feedback about your vision to code
review and safe coding as developers and security specialist.

Thanks for participating.

Regards
thesp0nge

-- 
Owasp Orizon leader
orizon.sourceforge.net
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
___


Re: [SC-L] Code review pool

2007-11-05 Thread Paolo Perego
Please apologies me. I figure out just know that livejournal.com
doesn't allow poll to be complete without a valid livejournal.com
account or openId.

So if you are not livejournal users and you don't want to became one
of them, you could answer the poll to me using email and I'll publish
results to another post to my blog.

Again sorry :(

thesp0nge

On 05/11/2007, ljknews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 At 12:50 PM +0100 11/5/07, Paolo Perego wrote:

  Hi guys, trying to improve Owasp Orizon project in a better way, I
  released a poll over my blog here:
  http://thesp0nge.livejournal.com/5687.html
 
  It would be great having your feedback about your vision to code
  review and safe coding as developers and security specialist.

 I see a bunch of links called View Answers along with a link
 called Poll #1083138.

 Clicking on the Poll #1083138 link takes me to a page of answers.
 --
 Larry Kilgallen
 ___
 Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
 List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
 List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
 SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
 as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
 ___



-- 
Owasp Orizon leader
orizon.sourceforge.net
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
___


[SC-L] Project announce: The OWASP Source Code Flaws Top 10

2008-12-16 Thread Paolo Perego
Hello leaders, I'm really happy to announce a new documentation
project I started today. Our Top 10 most critical web app
vulnerabilities is the standard de facto when trying to summarize
findings when you assess a web application. And it is great.

Looking at source code assessment (or code review, or static analysis,
or whatever the name you want to use :-)), nothing like this exists.
Gary McGraw introduced the 7 kingdoms as taxonomy. I started looking
at this great job extending it to meet Owasp Top 10 like template.
I also used categories that I found useful to gather security code
review findings in.

That's why I started this Top 10 project. The goal is to provide
something useful in Owasp Code Review Guide while trying to organize
security issues and the second goal is to use it as Owasp Orizon
default library cookbooks in order to have a fil rouge from Code
review guide and the implementing tool. The Source code flaws Top 10
will be that fil rouge.

I really hope that everyone interested will subscribe to mailing list
and give some contributions to this document I'd like to release as
beta quality project in the next AppSec Europe 2009 in Cracow.

Link: 
http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Source_Code_Flaws_Top_10_Project
Roadmap: 
http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Source_Code_Flaws_Top_10_Project_Roadmap
Mailinglist subscription page:
https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-source-code-flaws-top-10

Regards
thesp0nge

-- 
stay hungry, stay foolish

OWASP Orizon project, http://orizon.sourceforge.net
enjoy your code review experience
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
___


[SC-L] A new blog on application security - armoredcode.com

2012-03-20 Thread Paolo Perego
Hi list, just 2 lines for promoting my new blog on application security:
http://armoredcode.com
The idea is to talk about appsec using the developers language so talking
about testing frameworks and practices, libraries to enforce security, how
to read a penetration test report, some hands on with live code examples
and some interviews with appsec and developers superstar.

If you would like to add it on your feed, it would be great.

Thanks
Paolo

-- 
... static analysis is fun, again!

life from an application security guy ~ http://armoredcode.com
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
Follow KRvW Associates on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/KRvW_Associates
___


Re: [SC-L] A new blog on application security - armoredcode.com

2012-03-22 Thread Paolo Perego
On 21 March 2012 13:55, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Paolo Perego thesp0...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  If you would like to add it on your feed, it would be great.
 For the love of higher power, please discuss the tool chain's static
 analysis capabilities, and suggest a clean compile as a security gate
 (gcc: -Wall -Wextra -Wconversion).

Hi Jeff, thanks for the suggestion... I was arguing if there were people
interested in plain old school security applied to non web application.
Of course I'll cover static analysis and how to use compilers and
interpreters to spot security bugs...
I think some posts to recap what a buffer overflow or format bug
vulnerabilities are can be useful, what do you think about it? Does it make
sense?

From my experience, its nearly impossible to 'quick audit' a GNU
 project. Entering `make CFLAGS=-Wall -Wextra -Wconversion ... causes
 so much output its difficult to locate/triage issues.

It is... in this case, some grep command lines are more useful but it's a
very interesting topic to go deeper.


 You will be swimming against the tide with some of the l33t k3rn3l
 hack3rz: Gcc is crap [1].

 All assumptions about how perfect are compilers or interpreters go to
/dev/null. Software is written by humans, so all software is bugged by
definition. All checks are necessary .

Paolo


-- 
... static analysis is fun, again!

life from an application security guy ~ http://armoredcode.com
___
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
Follow KRvW Associates on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/KRvW_Associates
___