Secure-Software-Design Sample Questions Answers

Security testing reports are the most likely deliverables to contain detailed records of evaluations, their frequency, and re-evaluations. Here's why:

Purpose of Security Testing Reports: These reports document the results of security testing, including:

Types of tests: Vulnerability scans, penetration tests, code reviews, etc.

Frequency: How often tests were conducted (e.g., per build, per release cycle).

Re-evaluations: If vulnerabilities were discovered, these reports will track whether and how often those were retested after remediation.

Focus on Testing: The question specifically emphasizes evaluations, which aligns with the core content of security testing reports.

The Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) uses the following ranges to determine the severity rating of a vulnerability:

0.1 - 3.9: Low severity

4.0 - 6.9: Medium severity

7.0 - 8.9: High severity

9.0 - 10.0: Critical severity

Since the adjusted score for the vulnerability is 5.9, it falls within the High severity range.

References:

CVSS v3.1 Specification Document - FIRST: https://www.first.org/cvss/specification-document

National Vulnerability Database (NVD) - NIST: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln-metrics/cvss

 Session management is a core component of secure coding, which involves maintaining the state of a user’s interaction with a system. Proper session management can help protect against various security vulnerabilities, such as session hijacking and session fixation attacks. It is essential for ensuring that user data is handled securely throughout an application’s workflow.

References: The OWASP Secure Coding Practices guide emphasizes the importance of implementing secure coding standards, which include robust session management1. Additionally, Snyk’s secure coding practices highlight the significance of access control, including authentication and authorization, as fundamental to protecting a system2. These resources align with the concept that effective session management is a best practice in secure coding.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The scenario described indicates that the system was subjected to inputs containing random data and some structured query language (SQL) statements, leading to an exponential increase in test data. This behavior is characteristic of fuzzing, a testing technique used to identify vulnerabilities by inputting a wide range of random or unexpected data into the system.

Fuzzing aims to discover coding errors and security loopholes by bombarding the application with malformed or unexpected inputs, observing how the system responds. The presence of random characters and SQL statements suggests that the fuzzing tool was testing for vulnerabilities such as SQL injection by injecting various payloads into the system.

This approach is part of the Verification business function in the OWASP SAMM, specifically within the Security Testing practice. Security testing involves evaluating the software to identify vulnerabilities that could be exploited, and fuzzing is a common technique employed in this practice to ensure the robustness and security of the application.

References:

OWASP SAMM: Verification - Security Testing

The DKEAD category that has a risk rating based on the threat exploit’s potential level of harm is Damage potential. This category assesses the total damage or impact that a threat could cause if it is exploited by an attacker. The risk rating in this category is determined by evaluating the severity of the potential damage, which could range from information disclosure to complete system destruction or loss of system availability.

References:

DREAD Threat Modeling1

OWASP Risk Rating Methodology2

DREAD Threat Modeling: An Introduction to Qualitative Risk Analysis3

The secure coding best practice that requires authentication before allowing any files to be uploaded, and limits the types of files to only those needed for the business purpose, falls under the category of File Management. This practice is crucial for preventing unauthorized file uploads, which can be a common vector for attacks such as uploading malicious files or scripts. By enforcing authentication, the application ensures that only legitimate users can upload files. Additionally, restricting the file types to those necessary for business operations minimizes the risk of uploading potentially harmful files that could compromise the system.

References:

OWASP Secure Coding Practices1

File Upload Security Best Practices | CodeHandbook2

File Upload Protection – 10 Best Practices for Preventing … - OPSWAT3

 Data flow analysis is a manual code review technique where the reviewer traces the path of data from its entry point in the software (input control) through its processing and manipulation within the application, to its exit points (outputs). This technique is used to ensure that the data is handled securely throughout its lifecycle within the application and to identify any potential security vulnerabilities that may arise from improper data handling or processing12

The phase being described is the Design phase of the SDLC. During this phase, developers and IT staff determine the architectural and operational details of the product, which includes decisions on how to deliver various components such as secure REST services, mobile apps, and web applications. The Design phase is crucial for setting the foundation for the development work that will follow, ensuring that the product will be secure, scalable, and maintainable.

References: The information aligns with the descriptions of the SDLC phases provided in resources such as GitHub’s explanation of the SDLC1 and other industry-standard software development lifecycle resources234.

Manual peer review refers to the systematic examination of software source code by developers other than the original author. This practice is recognized as a valuable tool for reducing software defects and improving the quality of software projects. It involves developers inspecting the code to find and fix mistakes overlooked in the initial development phase, which enhances both the overall quality of software and the developers’ skills. Peer code review is less formal and more “lightweight” than the code inspections performed in the past, and it provides benefits such as knowledge transfer, increased team awareness, and creation of alternative solutions to problems.

References:

Expectations, Outcomes, and Challenges Of Modern Code Review1

Introduction to Software Engineering/Quality/Code Review2

Software Security during Modern Code Review: The Developer’s Perspective3

ASF Authentication Threats: The Web Application Security Frame (ASF) authentication category encompasses threats related to how users and systems prove their identity to the application. This includes issues like weak passwords, compromised credentials, and inadequate access controls.

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC): RBAC is a well-established security principle that aligns closely with addressing authentication threats. It involves assigning users to roles and granting those roles specific permissions based on the principle of least privilege. This limits the attack surface and reduces the impact of a compromised user account.

Let's analyze the other options:

B. Credentials and tokens are encrypted: While vital for security, encryption primarily protects data at rest or in transit. It doesn't directly address authentication risks like brute-force attacks or weak password management.

C. Cookies have expiration timestamps: Expiring cookies are a good practice, but their primary benefit is session management rather than directly mitigating authentication-specific threats.

D. Sensitive information is scrubbed from error messages: While essential for preventing information leakage, this practice doesn't address the core threats within the ASF authentication category.

References:

NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4, Access Control (AC) Family: (https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-53/rev-4/final ) Details the importance of RBAC as a cornerstone of access control.

The Web Application Security Frame (ASF): (https://patents.google.com/patent/US7818788B2/en ) Outlines the ASF categories, with authentication being one of the primary areas.

Data integrity requirements within a privacy impact statement ensure that personal information is maintained in an accurate and up-to-date manner. This involves establishing processes to regularly review and update personal data, as well as correct any inaccuracies. These requirements are crucial for maintaining the trustworthiness of the data and ensuring that decisions made based on this information are sound and reliable.

References:

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s guide on the Privacy Impact Assessment process emphasizes the importance of accuracy and currency of personal information1.

The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) outlines principles for data processing, including the necessity for data to be accurate and kept up to date2.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) also includes provisions for data protection impact assessments, which involve documenting processes before starting data processing3.

The issue described involves a PATCH request causing an unhandled server exception because the API does not support this method. The most direct and effective way to prevent such exceptions is to ensure that the API is configured to accept only the supported request methods: GET, POST, PUT, and DELETE. This can be achieved by implementing strict input validation to reject any requests that do not conform to the defined API specifications, including the request method. By doing so, any requests using unsupported methods like PATCH will be immediately rejected, thus preventing the server from reaching an exception state.

References:

OWASP’s guidance on error and exception handling emphasizes the importance of managing exceptions in a centralized manner and ensuring that all unexpected behavior is correctly handled within the application1.

Additional best practices for error handling in software development suggest the significance of input validation and the implementation of defensive programming techniques to prevent errors2.

The OWASP Foundation also highlights the principle that all security mechanisms should deny access until specifically granted, which supports the approach of configuring acceptable API requests3.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) Software Assurance Maturity Model (SAMM) is a framework designed to help organizations assess and improve their software security posture. SAMM is structured around five primary business functions: Governance, Design, Implementation, Verification, and Operations.

In this scenario, the focus is on reviewing design artifacts to ensure compliance with organizational security standards. This activity aligns with the Verification business function within SAMM. The Verification function encompasses security practices related to assessing and validating the security of software artifacts throughout the development lifecycle. Key practices under this function include:

Design Review: Evaluating design documents and models to identify potential security issues and ensure that security requirements are adequately addressed.

Code Review: Analyzing source code to detect security vulnerabilities and ensure adherence to secure coding standards.

Security Testing: Conducting various testing methodologies, such as penetration testing and vulnerability scanning, to identify and remediate security weaknesses in the software.

By focusing on the Verification function, the organization aims to proactively identify and address security concerns during the design and development phases, thereby enhancing the overall security posture of their software products.

References:

OWASP SAMM - Verification

 The category that classifies identified threats with no defenses in place, exposing the application to exploits, is Unmitigated Threats. This term refers to vulnerabilities for which no countermeasures or mitigations have been implemented. These threats are critical because they represent actual weaknesses that attackers can exploit. In the context of secure software design, it’s essential to identify these threats early in the SDLC to ensure that appropriate security controls can be designed and implemented to protect against them.

References:

Taxonomy of Cyber Threats to Application Security and Applicable Defenses1.

OWASP Foundation’s Threat Modeling Process2.

Mitigating Persistent Application Security Threats3.

The security assessment deliverable that identifies unmanaged code that must be kept up to date throughout the life of the product is the List of third-party software. Unmanaged code refers to code that does not run under the garbage-collected environment of the .NET Common Language Runtime, and it often includes legacy code, system libraries, or code written in languages that do not support automatic memory management. Keeping a list of third-party software is crucial because it helps organizations track dependencies and ensure they are updated, patched, and compliant with security standards. This is essential for maintaining the security posture of the software over time, as outdated components can introduce vulnerabilities.

References: The references provided from the web search results support the importance of monitoring and updating software components, including unmanaged code, as part of a secure software development lifecycle12.

After completing vulnerability scans and penetration analysis, security testers document the results to share with stakeholders, such as the organization’s largest customers. The deliverable being prepared in this context is the Security testing reports. These reports typically include detailed findings from the security assessments, explanations of the vulnerabilities discovered, the potential risks they pose, and recommendations for remediation. The purpose of these reports is to provide transparency about the security posture of the software or system and to guide the organization in addressing the identified security issues12. References: 1, 2

https://blog.halosecurity.com/what-really-matters-when-it-comes-to-pentesting-deliverables/

The Intelligence domain in the Building Security in Maturity Model (BSIMM) focuses on gathering and using information about software security. This includes understanding the types of attacks that are possible against the software being developed, which is why reviewing attack models falls under this domain. The BSIMM domain of Intelligence involves creating models of potential attacks on software (attack models), analyzing actual attacks that have occurred (attack intelligence), and sharing this information to improve security measures. By reviewing attack models, the software security group is essentially assessing the organization’s ability to anticipate and understand potential security threats, which is a key aspect of the Intelligence domain.

References: The references used to verify this answer include the official BSIMM documentation and related resources that describe the various domains and their activities within the BSIMM framework12345.

The category of secure software best practices being described is Training. This is because the focus is on educating new developers about organizational security policies and coding practices to mitigate potential threats. Training is a proactive approach to ensure that developers are aware of security concerns and are equipped with the knowledge to address them in their coding practices.

References: The importance of training in secure software best practices is supported by industry resources such as the SAFECode’s “Fundamental Practices for Secure Software Development” which emphasizes the need for application security control definition and management1, and the NIST’s Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF) which recommends integrating secure development practices throughout the software development lifecycle2. Additional support for this category can be found in resources detailing effective secure development practices345.

 The principle of running with the least privilege is a fundamental security concept that involves granting users only the permissions they need to perform their tasks and no more. This minimizes the risk of a user gaining access to administrator-level functionality that they are not authorized to use. By limiting the privileges of user accounts to the bare minimum necessary, the potential damage from various attacks, such as privilege escalation, is significantly reduced.

References: The concept of least privilege is widely recognized as a critical security measure. Resources like Exabeam’s article on preventing privilege escalation and TechTarget’s guide on privilege escalation attacks provide insights into how enforcing least privilege can mitigate such threats12. These sources verify that running with the least privilege is an effective mitigation technique against the threat of unauthorized access to elevated privileges.

The type of threat described is Tampering. This threat occurs when an attacker intercepts and manipulates data being sent from the client to the server, such as form data being submitted to an API. The attacker may alter the data to change the intended operation, inject malicious content, or compromise the integrity of the system. Tampering attacks are a significant concern in secure software design because they can lead to unauthorized changes and potentially harmful actions within the application.

References:

Understanding the different types of API attacks and their prevention1.

Comprehensive guide on API security and threat mitigation2.

Detailed analysis of Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks and their impact on API security3.

 The security testing technique that involves evaluating the vulnerability of all externally facing enterprise applications through both automated and manual system interactions is known as Penetration Testing. This method simulates real-world attacks on systems to identify potential vulnerabilities that could be exploited by attackers. It is a proactive approach to discover security weaknesses before they can be exploited in a real attack scenario. Penetration testing can include a variety of methods such as network scanning, application testing, and social engineering tactics to ensure a comprehensive security evaluation.

References: The concept of Penetration Testing as a method for evaluating vulnerabilities aligns with industry standards and practices, as detailed in resources from security-focused organizations and literature1.