Top 10-2017 Note About Risks - Revision history

T.Gigler: Editorial changes e.g. line feeds, added a link

2018-01-01T17:39:01Z

Editorial changes e.g. line feeds, added a link

T.Gigler: Updated Example

2017-12-12T22:21:10Z

Updated Example

T.Gigler: OWASP Top 10-2017 Release (Content based on Markdown)

2017-12-12T21:44:19Z

OWASP Top 10-2017 Release (Content based on Markdown)

T.Gigler: T.Gigler moved page Top 10 2017-Note About Risks to Top 10-2017 Note About Risks: OWASP Top 10-2017 Release

2017-12-12T19:49:10Z

T.Gigler moved page Top 10 2017-Note About Risks to Top 10-2017 Note About Risks: OWASP Top 10-2017 Release

T.Gigler: underlined all links, redefined links to OWASP as internal links

2017-04-23T15:42:44Z

underlined all links, redefined links to OWASP as internal links

Neil Smithline at 02:00, 22 April 2017

2017-04-22T02:00:33Z

Neil Smithline: Created page with "{{Top_10_2013:TopTemplate |usenext=2013NextLink |next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=risk|year=2017|language=en}} |useprev=2013PrevLink |prev={{Top_10:LanguageFile..."

2017-04-18T01:29:10Z

Created page with "{{Top_10_2013:TopTemplate |usenext=2013NextLink |next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=risk|year=2017|language=en}} |useprev=2013PrevLink |prev={{Top_10:LanguageFile..."

New page

{{Top_10_2013:TopTemplate
|usenext=2013NextLink
|next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=risk|year=2017|language=en}}
|useprev=2013PrevLink
|prev={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=introduction|year=2017|language=en}}
|year=2017
|language=en
}}

{{Top_10:SubsectionTableBeginTemplate|type=main}}{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionAdvancedTemplate|type={{Top_10_2010:StyleTemplate}}|subsection=freetext|position=firstWhole|title={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=SETYOURTITLEHERE|year=2017|language=en}}|width=100%|year=2017|language=en}}

Content goes here!

{{Top_10:SubsectionTableEndTemplate}}
{{Top_10_2013:BottomTemplate
|usenext=2013NextLink
|next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=risk|year=2017|language=en}}
|useprev=2013PrevLink
|prev={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=introduction|year=2017|language=en}}
|year=2017
|language=en
}}

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 <!--- +R Note About Risks --->
 {{Top_10:SubsectionTableBeginTemplate|type=main}}{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionAdvancedTemplate|type={{Top_10_2010:StyleTemplate}}|subsection=freetext|position=firstWhole|title=It's About the Risks that Weaknesses Represent|year=2017|language=en}}
-The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u>. For each Top 10 category, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change and evolve.
+The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u>. For each Top 10 category, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change and evolve.<br/>
 The <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u> defines numerous factors to help calculate the risk of an identified vulnerability. However, the Top 10 must talk about generalities, rather than specific vulnerabilities in real applications and APIs. Consequently, we can never be as precise as application owners or managers when calculating risks for their application(s). You are best equipped to judge the importance of your applications and data, what your threats are, and how your system has been built and is being operated.
-Our methodology includes three likelihood factors for each weakness (prevalence, detectability, and ease of exploit) and one impact factor (technical impact). The risk scales for each factor range from 1-Low to 3-High with terminology specific for each factor. The prevalence of a weakness is a factor that you typically don't have to calculate. For prevalence data, we have been supplied prevalence statistics from a number of different organizations (as referenced in the Acknowledgements on page 25), and we have aggregated their data together to come up with a Top 10 likelihood of existence list by prevalence. This data was then combined with the other two likelihood factors (detectability and ease of exploit) to calculate a likelihood rating for each weakness. The likelihood rating was then multiplied by our estimated average technical impact for each item to come up with an overall risk ranking for each item in the Top 10 (the higher the result the higher the risk). Detectability, Ease of Exploit, and Impact were calculated from analyzing reported CVEs that were associated with each of the Top 10 categories.
+The <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u> defines numerous factors to help calculate the risk of an identified vulnerability. However, the Top 10 must talk about generalities, rather than specific vulnerabilities in real applications and APIs. Consequently, we can never be as precise as application owners or managers when calculating risks for their application(s). You are best equipped to judge the importance of your applications and data, what your threats are, and how your system has been built and is being operated.<br/>
 <b>Note</b>: This approach does not take the likelihood of the threat agent into account. Nor does it account for any of the various technical details associated with your particular application. Any of these factors could significantly affect the overall likelihood of an attacker finding and exploiting a particular vulnerability. This rating does not take into account the actual impact on your business. Your organization will have to decide how much security risk from applications and APIs the organization is willing to accept given your culture, industry, and regulatory environment. The purpose of the OWASP Top 10 is not to do this risk analysis for you.
-The following illustrates our calculation of the risk for <b>A6:2017-Security Misconfiguration</b>
+Our methodology includes three likelihood factors for each weakness (prevalence, detectability, and ease of exploit) and one impact factor (technical impact). The risk scales for each factor range from 1-Low to 3-High with terminology specific for each factor. The prevalence of a weakness is a factor that you typically don't have to calculate. For prevalence data, we have been supplied prevalence statistics from a number of different organizations (as referenced in the Acknowledgements on page 25), and we have aggregated their data together to come up with a Top 10 likelihood of existence list by prevalence. This data was then combined with the other two likelihood factors (detectability and ease of exploit) to calculate a likelihood rating for each weakness. The likelihood rating was then multiplied by our estimated average technical impact for each item to come up with an overall risk ranking for each item in the Top 10 (the higher the result the higher the risk). Detectability, Ease of Exploit, and Impact were calculated from analyzing reported CVEs that were associated with each of the Top 10 categories.<br/>
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableHeaderBeginTemplate|year=2017|language=en}}
@@ Line 22: / Line 26: @@
 <td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">3</td>
 <td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">3</td>
-<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">2</td>
+<td>&nbsp;</td>
 <td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
 <tr>

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableHeaderBeginTemplate|year=2017|language=en}}
-{{Top_10:SummaryTableTemplate|exploitability=3|prevalence=3|detectability=3|impact=3|year=2017|language=en}}
+{{Top_10-2017:SummaryTableTemplate|exploitability=3|prevalence=3|detectability=3|impact=2|year=2017|language=en}}
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableHeaderEndTemplate|year=2017|language=en}}
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableEndTemplate|year=2017}}
 {{Top_10_2013:BottomAdvancedTemplate
      |type=box

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Top_10_2013:TopTemplate
-     |usenext=2013NextLink
+    |useprev=2017PrevLink
      |next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=detailsAboutRiskFactors|language=en}}
      |year=2017
      |language=en
 }}
+<!--- +R Note About Risks --->
-{{Top_10:SubsectionTableBeginTemplate|type=main}} {{Top_10_2010:SubsectionAdvancedTemplate|type={{Top_10_2010:StyleTemplate}}|subsection=freetext|position=firstWhole|title={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=itsAboutRisksNotWeaknesses|language=en}}|width=100%|year=2017}}
+{{Top_10:SubsectionTableBeginTemplate|type=main}}{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionAdvancedTemplate|type={{Top_10_2010:StyleTemplate}}|subsection=freetext|position=firstWhole|title=It's About the Risks that Weaknesses Represent|year=2017|language=en}}
+The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u>. For each Top 10 category, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change and evolve.
+The <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u> defines numerous factors to help calculate the risk of an identified vulnerability. However, the Top 10 must talk about generalities, rather than specific vulnerabilities in real applications and APIs. Consequently, we can never be as precise as application owners or managers when calculating risks for their application(s). You are best equipped to judge the importance of your applications and data, what your threats are, and how your system has been built and is being operated.
-Although the <u>[[Top_10_2007|2007]]</u> and earlier versions of the <u>[[Top10|OWASP Top 10]]</u> focused on identifying the most prevalent “vulnerabilities”, the OWASP Top 10 has always been organized around risks. This focus on risks has caused some understandable confusion on the part of people searching for an airtight weakness taxonomy. The <u>[[Top_10_2010|OWASP Top 10 for 2010]]</u> clarified the risk-focus in the Top 10 by being very explicit about how threat agents, attack vectors, weaknesses, technical impacts, and business impacts combine to produce risks. This version of the OWASP Top 10 continues to follow the same methodology.
+Our methodology includes three likelihood factors for each weakness (prevalence, detectability, and ease of exploit) and one impact factor (technical impact). The risk scales for each factor range from 1-Low to 3-High with terminology specific for each factor. The prevalence of a weakness is a factor that you typically don't have to calculate. For prevalence data, we have been supplied prevalence statistics from a number of different organizations (as referenced in the Acknowledgements on page 25), and we have aggregated their data together to come up with a Top 10 likelihood of existence list by prevalence. This data was then combined with the other two likelihood factors (detectability and ease of exploit) to calculate a likelihood rating for each weakness. The likelihood rating was then multiplied by our estimated average technical impact for each item to come up with an overall risk ranking for each item in the Top 10 (the higher the result the higher the risk). Detectability, Ease of Exploit, and Impact were calculated from analyzing reported CVEs that were associated with each of the Top 10 categories.
+<b>Note</b>: This approach does not take the likelihood of the threat agent into account. Nor does it account for any of the various technical details associated with your particular application. Any of these factors could significantly affect the overall likelihood of an attacker finding and exploiting a particular vulnerability. This rating does not take into account the actual impact on your business. Your organization will have to decide how much security risk from applications and APIs the organization is willing to accept given your culture, industry, and regulatory environment. The purpose of the OWASP Top 10 is not to do this risk analysis for you.
-The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u>. For each Top 10 item, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then rank ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change.
+The following illustrates our calculation of the risk for <b>A6:2017-Security Misconfiguration</b>
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableHeaderBeginTemplate|year=2017|language=en}}
-{{Top_10:SummaryTableTemplate|exploitability=2|prevalence=0|detectability=1|impact=2|year=2017|language=en}}
+{{Top_10:SummaryTableTemplate|exploitability=3|prevalence=3|detectability=3|impact=3|year=2017|language=en}}
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableHeaderEndTemplate|year=2017|language=en}}
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
-<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">2</td>
+<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">3</td>
-<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">0</td>
+<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">3</td>
-<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">1</td>
+<td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">3</td>
 <td style="text-align: center; padding: 4px; font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; border: 3px solid #444444;">2</td>
 <td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
@@ Line 36: / Line 27: @@
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
 <td colspan="3" style="border: {{Top 10:BorderColor|year=2017}} 1px solid; background-color: #D9D9D9; text-align: center; padding: 4px;">
-<span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 150%; color: red;">Likelihood Rating: 1</span><br/>
+<span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 150%; color: red;">Likelihood Rating: 3.0</span><br/>
 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(Average of Exploitability, Prevalence and Detectability)</td>
 <td style="border: {{Top 10:BorderColor|year=2017}} 1px solid; background-color: #D9D9D9; text-align: center; padding: 4px;"><span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 150%; color: red;">*&nbsp;2&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></td>
@@ Line 44: / Line 35: @@
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
 <td colspan="3"  style="border:{{Top 10:BorderColor|year=2017}} 1px solid; background-color: #D9D9D9; text-align: center; padding: 4px;">
-<span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 150%; color: red;">Risk Ranking: 2</span><br/>
+<span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 150%; color: red;">Risk Ranking: 6.0</span><br/>
 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(Likelihood * Impact)
 <td>&nbsp;</td>
 {{Top_10_2010:SummaryTableEndTemplate|year=2017}}
 <br/>
-{{Top_10:SubsectionTableEndTemplate}}
+{{Top_10_2013:BottomAdvancedTemplate
-{{Top_10_2013:BottomTemplate
+     |type=box
-     |type={{Top_10_2010:StyleTemplate}}
+    |useprev=2017PrevLink
-     |usenext=2013NextLink
+    |prev={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=whatsNextforApplicationManagers|language=en}}
      |next={{Top_10:LanguageFile|text=detailsAboutRiskFactors|language=en}}
      |year=2017
      |language=en
 }}

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
-Although the [https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2007 2007] and earlier versions of the [https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top10 OWASP Top 10] focused on identifying the most prevalent “vulnerabilities,” the OWASP Top 10 has always been organized around risks. This focus on risks has caused some understandable confusion on the part of people searching for an airtight weakness taxonomy. The [https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2010 OWASP Top 10 for 2010] clarified the risk-focus in the Top 10 by being very explicit about how threat agents, attack vectors, weaknesses, technical impacts, and business impacts combine to produce risks. This version of the OWASP Top 10 continues to follow the same methodology.
+Although the <u>[[Top_10_2007|2007]]</u> and earlier versions of the <u>[[Top10|OWASP Top 10]]</u> focused on identifying the most prevalent “vulnerabilities”, the OWASP Top 10 has always been organized around risks. This focus on risks has caused some understandable confusion on the part of people searching for an airtight weakness taxonomy. The <u>[[Top_10_2010|OWASP Top 10 for 2010]]</u> clarified the risk-focus in the Top 10 by being very explicit about how threat agents, attack vectors, weaknesses, technical impacts, and business impacts combine to produce risks. This version of the OWASP Top 10 continues to follow the same methodology.
-The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the [https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]. For each Top 10 item, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then rank ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change.
+The Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 is based on the <u>[[OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology|OWASP Risk Rating Methodology]]</u>. For each Top 10 item, we estimated the typical risk that each weakness introduces to a typical web application by looking at common likelihood factors and impact factors for each common weakness. We then rank ordered the Top 10 according to those weaknesses that typically introduce the most significant risk to an application. These factors get updated with each new Top 10 release as things change.
 The OWASP Risk Rating Methodology defines numerous factors to help calculate the risk of an identified vulnerability. However, the Top 10 must talk about generalities, rather than specific vulnerabilities in real applications and APIs. Consequently, we can never be as precise as system owners can be when calculating risks for their application(s). You are best equipped to judge the importance of your applications and data, what your threats are, and how your system has been built and is being operated.

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:49, 12 December 2017
(No difference)