4.0

More documents

Recommendations

Info

20Testing Guide Introductionassessment is not required (such as for auditing purposes).Since these tests are the last resort for fixing vulnerabilities beforethe application is released to production, it is important thatsuch issues are addressed as recommended by the testing team.The recommendations can include code, design, or configurationchange. At this level, security auditors and information security officersdiscuss the reported security issues and analyze the potentialrisks according to information risk management procedures. Suchprocedures might require the development team to fix all high riskvulnerabilities before the application can be deployed, unless suchrisks are acknowledged and accepted.Developers’ Security TestsSecurity Testing in the Coding Phase: Unit TestsFrom the developer’s perspective, the main objective of securitytests is to validate that code is being developed in compliance withsecure coding standards requirements. Developers’ own codingartifacts (such as functions, methods, classes, APIs, and libraries)need to be functionally validated before being integrated into theapplication build.The security requirements that developers have to follow should bedocumented in secure coding standards and validated with staticand dynamic analysis. If the unit test activity follows a secure codereview, unit tests can validate that code changes required by securecode reviews are properly implemented. Secure code reviewsand source code analysis through source code analysis tools helpdevelopers in identifying security issues in source code as it is developed.By using unit tests and dynamic analysis (e.g., debugging)developers can validate the security functionality of components aswell as verify that the countermeasures being developed mitigateany security risks previously identified through threat modeling andsource code analysis.A good practice for developers is to build security test cases as ageneric security test suite that is part of the existing unit testingframework. A generic security test suite could be derived from previouslydefined use and misuse cases to security test functions,methods and classes. A generic security test suite might includesecurity test cases to validate both positive and negative requirementsfor security controls such as:• Identity, Authentication & Access Control• Input Validation & Encoding• Encryption• User and Session Management• Error and Exception Handling• Auditing and LoggingDevelopers empowered with a source code analysis tool integratedinto their IDE, secure coding standards, and a security unit testingframework can assess and verify the security of the software componentsbeing developed. Security test cases can be run to identifypotential security issues that have root causes in source code: besidesinput and output validation of parameters entering and exitingthe components, these issues include authentication and authorizationchecks done by the component, protection of the data withinthe component, secure exception and error handling, and secureauditing and logging. Unit test frameworks such as Junit, Nunit,and CUnit can be adapted to verify security test requirements. Inthe case of security functional tests, unit level tests can test thefunctionality of security controls at the software component level,such as functions, methods, or classes. For example, a test casecould validate input and output validation (e.g., variable sanitation)and boundary checks for variables by asserting the expected functionalityof the component.The threat scenarios identified with use and misuse cases can beused to document the procedures for testing software components.In the case of authentication components, for example, securityunit tests can assert the functionality of setting an accountlockout as well as the fact that user input parameters cannot beabused to bypass the account lockout (e.g., by setting the accountlockout counter to a negative number).At the component level, security unit tests can validate positive assertionsas well as negative assertions, such as errors and exceptionhandling. Exceptions should be caught without leaving the systemin an insecure state, such as potential denial of service causedby resources not being de-allocated (e.g., connection handles notclosed within a final statement block), as well as potential elevationof privileges (e.g., higher privileges acquired before the exception isthrown and not re-set to the previous level before exiting the function).Secure error handling can validate potential information disclosurevia informative error messages and stack traces.Unit level security test cases can be developed by a security engineerwho is the subject matter expert in software security and isalso responsible for validating that the security issues in the sourcecode have been fixed and can be checked into the integrated systembuild. Typically, the manager of the application builds also makessure that third-party libraries and executable files are security assessedfor potential vulnerabilities before being integrated in theapplication build.Threat scenarios for common vulnerabilities that have root causesin insecure coding can also be documented in the developer’s securitytesting guide. When a fix is implemented for a coding defectidentified with source code analysis, for example, security test casescan verify that the implementation of the code change followsthe secure coding requirements documented in the secure codingstandards.Source code analysis and unit tests can validate that the codechange mitigates the vulnerability exposed by the previously identifiedcoding defect. The results of automated secure code analysiscan also be used as automatic check-in gates for version control, forexample software artifacts cannot be checked into the build withhigh or medium severity coding issues.Functional Testers’ Security TestsSecurity Testing During the Integration and Validation Phase:Integrated System Tests and Operation TestsThe main objective of integrated system tests is to validate the “defensein depth” concept, that is, that the implementation of securitycontrols provides security at different layers. For example, thelack of input validation when calling a component integrated withthe application is often a factor that can be tested with integrationtesting.The integration system test environment is also the first environ-
21Testing Guide Introductionment where testers can simulate real attack scenarios as can bepotentially executed by a malicious external or internal user of theapplication. Security testing at this level can validate whether vulnerabilitiesare real and can be exploited by attackers. For example,a potential vulnerability found in source code can be rated as highrisk because of the exposure to potential malicious users, as wellas because of the potential impact (e.g., access to confidential information).Real attack scenarios can be tested with both manual testing techniquesand penetration testing tools. Security tests of this type arealso referred to as ethical hacking tests. From the security testingperspective, these are risk driven tests and have the objective oftesting the application in the operational environment. The targetis the application build that is representative of the version of theapplication being deployed into production.Including security testing in the integration and validation phaseis critical to identifying vulnerabilities due to integration of componentsas well as validating the exposure of such vulnerabilities.Application security testing requires a specialized set ofskills, including both software and security knowledge, that arenot typical of security engineers.As a result organizations are oftenrequired to security-train their software developers on ethicalhacking techniques, security assessment procedures and tools.A realistic scenario is to develop such resources in-house anddocument them in security testing guides and procedures thattake into account the developer’s security testing knowledge.A so called “security test cases cheat list or check-list”, for example,can provide simple test cases and attack vectors that can be usedby testers to validate exposure to common vulnerabilities such asspoofing, information disclosures, buffer overflows, format strings,SQL injection and XSS injection, XML, SOAP, canonicalization issues,denial of service and managed code and ActiveX controls (e.g., .NET).A first battery of these tests can be performed manually with a verybasic knowledge of software security.The first objective of security tests might be the validation of a setof minimum security requirements. These security test cases mightconsist of manually forcing the application into error and exceptionalstates and gathering knowledge from the application behavior.For example, SQL injection vulnerabilities can be tested manually byinjecting attack vectors through user input and by checking if SQLexceptions are thrown back the user. The evidence of a SQL exceptionerror might be a manifestation of a vulnerability that can beexploited.A more in-depth security test might require the tester’s knowledgeof specialized testing techniques and tools. Besides sourcecode analysis and penetration testing, these techniques include, forexample, source code and binary fault injection, fault propagationanalysis and code coverage, fuzz testing, and reverse engineering.The security testing guide should provide procedures and recommendtools that can be used by security testers to perform suchin-depth security assessments.The next level of security testing after integration system tests is toperform security tests in the user acceptance environment. Thereare unique advantages to performing security tests in the operationalenvironment. The user acceptance tests environment (UAT)is the one that is most representative of the release configuration,with the exception of the data (e.g., test data is used in place of realdata). A characteristic of security testing in UAT is testing for securityconfiguration issues. In some cases these vulnerabilities mightrepresent high risks. For example, the server that hosts the webapplication might not be configured with minimum privileges, validSSL certificate and secure configuration, essential services disabledand web root directory not cleaned from test and administrationweb pages.Security Test Data Analysis and ReportingGoals for Security Test Metrics and MeasurementsDefining the goals for the security testing metrics and measurementsis a prerequisite for using security testing data for risk analysisand management processes. For example, a measurementsuch as the total number of vulnerabilities found with security testsmight quantify the security posture of the application. These measurementsalso help to identify security objectives for software securitytesting.For example, reducing the number of vulnerabilities toan acceptable number (minimum) before the application is deployedinto production.Another manageable goal could be to compare the applicationsecurity posture against a baseline to assess improvements inapplication security processes. For example, the security metricsbaseline might consist of an application that was tested only withpenetration tests. The security data obtained from an applicationthat was also security tested during coding should show an improvement(e.g., fewer number of vulnerabilities) when comparedwith the baseline.In traditional software testing, the number of software defects,such as the bugs found in an application, could provide a measure ofsoftware quality. Similarly, security testing can provide a measureof software security. From the defect management and reportingperspective, software quality and security testing can use similarcategorizations for root causes and defect remediation efforts.From the root cause perspective, a security defect can be due to anerror in design (e.g., security flaws) or due to an error in coding (e.g.,security bug). From the perspective of the effort required to fix adefect, both security and quality defects can be measured in termsof developer hours to implement the fix, the tools and resourcesrequired to fix, and the cost to implement the fix.A characteristic of security test data, compared to quality data,is the categorization in terms of the threat, the exposure ofthe vulnerability, and the potential impact posed by the vulnerabilityto determine the risk. Testing applications for securityconsists of managing technical risks to make sure thatthe application countermeasures meet acceptable levels.For this reason, security testing data needs to support the securityrisk strategy at critical checkpoints during the SDLC.For example, vulnerabilities found in source code with source codeanalysis represent an initial measure of risk. A measure of risk(e.g., high, medium, low) for the vulnerability can be calculated bydetermining the exposure and likelihood factors and by validatingthe vulnerability with penetration tests. The risk metrics associatedto vulnerabilities found with security tests empower businessmanagement to make risk management decisions, such as to decidewhether risks can be accepted, mitigated, or transferred atdifferent levels within the organization (e.g., business as well astechnical risks).
Page 1 and 2: 1Testing Guide4.0Project Leaders: M
Page 3 and 4: Testing Guide Foreword - Table of c
Page 5 and 6: 3Testing Guide Foreword - Table of
Page 7 and 8: 5Testing Guide Foreword - By Eoin K
Page 9 and 10: 7Testing Guide Frontispiece1Testing
Page 11 and 12: 9Testing Guide Introduction2The OWA
Page 13 and 14: 11Testing Guide Introductionvide en
Page 15 and 16: 13Testing Guide IntroductionTesting
Page 17 and 18: 15Testing Guide Introductionlaid on
Page 19 and 20: 17Testing Guide Introductionvalidat
Page 21: 19Testing Guide IntroductionUSERthe
Page 25 and 26: 23Testing Guide Introductionoffendi
Page 27 and 28: 25The OWASP Testing Frameworksectio
Page 29 and 30: 27Web Application Penetration Testi
Page 73 and 74:
71Web Application Penetration Testi
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
101Web Application Penetration Test
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
209same code can be applied to sess
Page 213 and 214:
211ReportingTest IDLowest versionIn
Page 215 and 216:
213ReportingTest IDBusiness Logic T
Page 217 and 218:
215Appendixkajfghlhfkcocafkcjlajldi
Page 219 and 220:
217AppendixTesting - http:/www.nist
Page 221 and 222:
219Cross Site Scripting (XSS)For de
Page 223 and 224:
221LDAP InjectionFor details on LDA
show all

4.0

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?