Top 10 2010-RN - Revision history

Neil Smithline: Redirected page to Top 10 2010-Release Notes

2010-04-21T00:00:14Z

Redirected page to Top 10 2010-Release Notes

Neil Smithline at 23:52, 20 April 2010

2010-04-20T23:52:35Z

Neil Smithline at 23:26, 20 April 2010

2010-04-20T23:26:38Z

Neil Smithline: Created page with '{{Top_10_2010:TopTemplate|usenext=NextLink|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management|useprev=PrevLink|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery|usemain=MainLink|main=}} {{Top_…'

2010-04-20T21:51:01Z

Created page with '{{Top_10_2010:TopTemplate|usenext=NextLink|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management|useprev=PrevLink|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery|usemain=MainLink|main=}} {{Top_…'

New page

{{Top_10_2010:TopTemplate|usenext=NextLink|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management|useprev=PrevLink|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery|usemain=MainLink|main=}}

{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionColoredTemplate|It's About Risks, Not Weaknesses|
Although [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2007 previous versions of the OWASP Top 10] focused on identifying the most common “vulnerabilities,” these documents have actually always been organized around risks. This caused some understandable confusion on the part of people searching for an airtight weakness taxonomy. This update clarifies the risk-focus in the Top 10 by being more explicit about how threat agents, attack vectors, weaknesses, technical impacts, and business impacts combine to produce risks.

To do so, we developed a Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 that is based on the [http://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.

The [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology 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. Consequently, we can never be as precise as a system owner can when calculating risk for their application(s). We don’t know how important your applications and data are, what your threat agents are, nor 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 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 and we have averaged 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. This 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.

Note that 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 also does not take into account the actual impact on your business. Your organization will have to decide how much security risk from applications the organization is willing to accept. 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 A2: Cross-Site Scripting, as an example. Note that XSS is so prevalent that it warranted the only ‘VERY WIDESPREAD’ prevalence value. All other risks ranged from widespread to uncommon (values 1 to 3).
}}

<center>
{| style="align:center; text-align:center; border:2px solid #4F81BD; background-color:#F2F2F2; padding=2;"
|- style="background-color: #4F81Bd; color: #000000;"
! Threat Agents !! Attack Vectors
! colspan="2" | Security Weakness
! Technical Impact
! Business Impacts
|-
| style="background-color: #D9D9D9; color: #000000;" | ______
| style="background-color: #FFB200; color: #000000;" | Exploitability AVERAGE
| style="background-color: #FF00FF; color: #000000;" | Prevalence VERY WIDESPREAD
| style="background-color: #FF0000; color: #000000;" | Detectability EASY
| style="background-color: #FFB200; color: #000000;" | Impact MODERATE

| style="background-color: #D9D9D9; color: #000000;" | ______
|-
| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
| colspan="2" style="text-align: left;border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
|}
</center>

 {{Top_10_2010:BottomTemplate|usenext=NextLink|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management|useprev=PrevLink|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery|usemain=MainLink|main=}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:00, 21 April 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~{{Top_10_2010:TopTemplate\|usenext=NextLink\|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management\|useprev=PrevLink\|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery\|usemain=MainLink\|main=}}~~	+	#REDIRECT [[Top_10_2010-Release_Notes]]
−
−
−	~~{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionColoredTemplate\|What Changed From 2007 to 2010?\|}}~~
−	The threat landscape for Internet applications constantly changes. Key factors in this evolution are advances made by attackers, the release of new technology, as well as the deployment of increasingly complex systems. To keep pace, we periodically update the OWASP Top 10. In this 2010 release, we have made three significant changes:
−	~~# We clarified that the Top 10 is about the Top 10 Risks, not the Top 10 most common weaknesses. See the details on the “Application Security Risks” page below.~~
−	# We changed our ranking methodology to estimate risk, instead of relying solely on the frequency of the associated weakness. This has affected the ordering of the Top 10, as you can see in the table below.
−	~~# We replaced two items on the list with two new items:~~
−	~~<div style="margin-left: 50px;">~~
−	* ADDED: A6 – Security Misconfiguration. This issue was A10 in the Top 10 from 2004: Insecure Configuration Management, but was dropped in 2007 because it wasn’t considered to be a software issue. However, from an organizational risk and prevalence perspective, it clearly merits re-inclusion in the Top 10; so now it’s back.
−	* ADDED: A10 – Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards. This issue is making its debut in the Top 10. The evidence shows that this relatively unknown issue is widespread and can cause significant damage.
−	* REMOVED: A3 – Malicious File Execution. This is still a significant problem in many different environments. However, its prevalence in 2007 was inflated by large numbers of PHP applications having this problem. PHP now ships with a more secure configuration by default, lowering the prevalence of this problem.
−	* REMOVED: A6 – Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling. This issue is extremely prevalent, but the impact of disclosing stack trace and error message information is typically minimal. With the addition of Security Misconfiguration this year, proper configuration of error handling is a big part of securely configuring your application and servers.</div>
−
−
−	~~<center>~~
−	~~{\| style="width: 100%; align:center; text-align:center; border:2px solid #4F81BD; background-color:#F2F2F2; padding=2;"~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #4F81Bd; color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~! OWASP Top 10 - 2007 (Previous Version) !! OWASP Top 10 - 2010 (Current Version)~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A2-Injection Flaws~~
−	~~\| A1-Injection~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color:~~ #~~FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A1-Cross Site Scripting (XSS)~~
−	~~\| A2-Cross Site Scripting (XSS)~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A7-Broken Authentication and Session Management~~
−	~~\| A3-Broken Authentication and Session Management~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A4-Insecure Direct Object Reference~~
−	~~\| A4-Insecure Direct Object References~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A5-Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)~~
−	~~\| A5-Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #D7D6C0;"~~
−	~~\| (was T10 2004 A10 - Insecure Configuration Management)~~
−	~~\| A6 Security Misconfiguration (NEW)~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A8-Insecure Cryptographic Storage~~
−	~~\| A7-Insecure Cryptographic Storage~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A10-Failure to Restrict URL Access~~
−	~~\| A8-Failure to Restrict URL Access~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"~~
−	~~\| A9-Insecure Communications~~
−	~~\| A9-Insufficient Transport Layer Protection~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #D7D6C0;"~~
−	~~\| (not in 2007 Top 10)~~
−	~~\| A10-Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (NEW)~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #E6B9B8;"~~
−	~~\| A3-Malicious File Execution~~
−	~~\| <dropped from 2010 Top 10>~~
−	~~\|- style="background-color: #E6B9B8;"~~
−	~~\| A6-Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling~~
−	~~\| <dropped from 2010 Top 10>~~
−	\|}
−	~~</center>~~
−
−	~~<br> {{~~Top_10_2010~~:BottomTemplate\|usenext=NextLink\|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management\|useprev=PrevLink\|prev=~~-~~Cross Site Request Forgery\|usemain=MainLink\|main=}}~~

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 * REMOVED: A3 – Malicious File Execution. This is still a significant problem in many different environments. However, its prevalence in 2007 was inflated by large numbers of PHP applications having this problem. PHP now ships with a more secure configuration by default, lowering the prevalence of this problem.
 * REMOVED: A6 – Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling. This issue is extremely prevalent, but the impact of disclosing stack trace and error message information is typically minimal. With the addition of Security Misconfiguration this year, proper configuration of error handling is a big part of securely configuring your application and servers.</div>
 <center>
 {| style="width: 100%; align:center; text-align:center; border:2px solid #4F81BD; background-color:#F2F2F2; padding=2;"
-|- style="background-color: #4F81Bd; color: #000000;"
+|- style="background-color: #4F81Bd; color: #FFFFFF;"
-! Threat Agents !! Attack Vectors
+! OWASP Top 10 - 2007 (Previous Version) !! OWASP Top 10 - 2010 (Current Version)
-! colspan="2" | Security Weakness
+|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"
-! Technical Impact
+| A2-Injection Flaws
-! Business Impacts
+| A1-Injection
-|-
+|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"
-| style="background-color: #D9D9D9; color: #000000;" | ______
+| A1-Cross Site Scripting (XSS)
-| style="background-color: #FFB200; color: #000000;" | Exploitability<br>AVERAGE
+| A2-Cross Site Scripting (XSS)
-| style="background-color: #FF00FF; color: #000000;" | Prevalence<br>VERY WIDESPREAD
+|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"
-| style="background-color: #FF0000; color: #000000;" | Detectability<br>EASY
+| A7-Broken Authentication and Session Management
-| style="background-color: #FFB200; color: #000000;" | Impact<br>MODERATE
+| A3-Broken Authentication and Session Management
+|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"
-| style="background-color: #D9D9D9; color: #000000;" | ______
+| A4-Insecure Direct Object Reference
-|-
+| A4-Insecure Direct Object References
-| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
+|- style="background-color: #FFFFFF;"
-| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
+| A5-Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
-| colspan="2" style="text-align: left;border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
+| A5-Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
-| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
+|- style="background-color: #D7D6C0;"
-| style="text-align: left; border: 2px solid #FFFFFF;" | TODO
+| (was T10 2004 A10 - Insecure Configuration Management)
 |}
 </center>
 <br> {{Top_10_2010:BottomTemplate|usenext=NextLink|next=-Broken Authentication and Session Management|useprev=PrevLink|prev=-Cross Site Request Forgery|usemain=MainLink|main=}}

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
-{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionColoredTemplate|It's About Risks, Not Weaknesses|
+{{Top_10_2010:SubsectionColoredTemplate|What Changed From 2007 to 2010?|}}
-Although [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2007 previous versions of the OWASP Top 10] focused on identifying the most common “vulnerabilities,” these documents have actually always been organized around risks. This caused some understandable confusion on the part of people searching for an airtight weakness taxonomy. This update clarifies the risk-focus in the Top 10 by being more explicit about how threat agents, attack vectors, weaknesses, technical impacts, and business impacts combine to produce risks.
+The threat landscape for Internet applications constantly changes. Key factors in this evolution are advances made by attackers, the release of new technology, as well as the deployment of increasingly complex systems. To keep pace, we periodically update the OWASP Top 10. In this 2010 release, we have made three significant changes:
+# We clarified that the Top 10 is about the Top 10 Risks, not the Top 10 most common weaknesses. See the details on the “Application Security Risks” page below.
-To do so, we developed a Risk Rating methodology for the Top 10 that is based on the [http://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.
+# We changed our ranking methodology to estimate risk, instead of relying solely on the frequency of the associated weakness. This has affected the ordering of the Top 10, as you can see in the table below.
+# We replaced two items on the list with two new items:
-The [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Risk_Rating_Methodology 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. Consequently, we can never be as precise as a system owner can when calculating risk for their application(s). We don’t know how important your applications and data are, what your threat agents are, nor how your system has been built and is being operated.
+<div style="margin-left: 50px;">
+* ADDED: A6 – Security Misconfiguration. This issue was A10 in the Top 10 from 2004: Insecure Configuration Management, but was dropped in 2007 because it wasn’t considered to be a software issue. However, from an organizational risk and prevalence perspective, it clearly merits re-inclusion in the Top 10; so now it’s back.
-Our methodology includes three likelihood factors for each weakness (prevalence, detectability, and ease of exploit) and one impact factor (technical impact). 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 and we have averaged 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. This 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.
+* ADDED: A10 – Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards. This issue is making its debut in the Top 10. The evidence shows that this relatively unknown issue is widespread and can cause significant damage.
+* REMOVED: A3 – Malicious File Execution. This is still a significant problem in many different environments. However, its prevalence in 2007 was inflated by large numbers of PHP applications having this problem. PHP now ships with a more secure configuration by default, lowering the prevalence of this problem.
-Note that 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 also does not take into account the actual impact on your business. <u>Your organization</u> will have to decide how much security risk from applications <u>the organization</u> is willing to accept. The purpose of the OWASP Top 10 is not to do this risk analysis for you.
+* REMOVED: A6 – Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling. This issue is extremely prevalent, but the impact of disclosing stack trace and error message information is typically minimal. With the addition of Security Misconfiguration this year, proper configuration of error handling is a big part of securely configuring your application and servers.</div>
 <center>
-{| style="align:center; text-align:center; border:2px solid #4F81BD; background-color:#F2F2F2; padding=2;"
+{| style="width: 100%; align:center; text-align:center; border:2px solid #4F81BD; background-color:#F2F2F2; padding=2;"
 |- style="background-color: #4F81Bd; color: #000000;"
 ! Threat Agents !! Attack Vectors