Difference between revisions of "OWASP Security Integration System"

Low levels of compliance

• Development teams don’t have the time to study and understand the complex security requirements and don’t know how to write code or test code that implements it

Compliance and assurance seen as blockers

• Approvers and assurance teams delay release while development teams do a post development, blind scramble for evidence to prove they have met security requirements

Duplication of effort and inconsistent implementation

• Complex application landscapes with multiple dev teams, application and technologies make it difficult to control and coordinate development and testing effort

See below how the Secure code assurance tool integrates security into software development phases

Without further complicating development environment

• SCAT is a simple 5 screen MVC, C# web application with a small footprint that can be deployed without further complicating development environment
• Integrates with Jira and runs ZAP and SonarQube in docker containers
• SCAT is part of three domains to consider when securing software development. I've detailed the other domains in an article that will be published in the Nov/Dec issue of the ISC2 magazine, I will add a link here after publication.

  Sprint planning phase

  Objective: Ensures security requirements are understood
  

  • Developers use the Identify risks screen to
    
    1. Select the critical function to developing/changing
    2. Identify the technologies used
    3. Automatically generate the security requirements and tests

                   See how to use the tools and its internal mapping to generate security requirements
    

  • Product owners use the Secure code requirements screen to
    
    1. Create an audit trail to store evidence of secure development
    2. Create Jira tickets for requirements and tests to manage work

  Development phase

  Objective: Ensure correct implementation of security requirements
  

  • Developers use the Secure development screen to
    
    1. View and understand how to attack and prevent the risk
    2. View the secure code requirements
    3. View the secure code block to implement the security requirement
    4. Manage development effort in Jira
    5. After development run a ZAP basic scan to verify security requirements have been correctly implemented

                    See how the tool helps developers understand security requirements and write secure code
    

  Secure code review phase

  Objective: Ensure correct implementation of security requirements
  

  • Code reviewers use the Secure code review screen to
    
    1. Guide manually secure code review
    2. After manual secure code review run a Sonarqube scan to verify security requirements have been correctly implemented

                   See how the tool verifies correct security requirements implementation
    

  Testing phase

  Objective: Ensure valid security testing
  

  • Testers use the Secure testing screen to
    
    1. View the test plans required to test the risk
    2. Manage testing effort in Jira

                   See how the tool helps testers test risk mitigation efforts
    

  Approval phase

  Objective: Streamline the approval and audit process
  

  • Approvers use the Assurance evidence screen to
    
    1. View relevant testing evidence alongside the risk, reducing the time assurance teams need to examine and approve releases
    2. View verified development effort and whether it falls within risk tolerance levels

                   See how the tool streamlines the approval process with centrally stored testing evidence
    

  Risk management

  Objective: Enable risk managers to prioritise, plan and monitor mitigation efforts
  

  • Risk managers use the Application risk exposure screen to
    
    1. View each application critical function and the associated risks
    2. Identify where mitigation effort is required by viewing which risks require security requirements
    3. Identify where development effort is required by viewing which security requirements need secure code blocks
    4. Identify where extra testing effort is required by viewing which risks require security test plans

                   See how the Application landscape overview screen informs risk based decision making
    

  
  
  

When developing secure software we need to consider both standard secure code and client specific architectural requirements

Standard secure code requirements

• SCAT comes out the box with a standard OWASP secure code requirements map. This mapping need to be modified to the specific organisation requirements




• Information security and development team use the Internal mapping screen to
  1. Map the security requirements to OWASP risks
  2. Map organisation approved secure code blocks to security requirements
  3. Map security test plans to OWASP risks

                 See how to setup the SCAT's internal mapping
  

Client specific architectural requirements

• To generate these requirements we perform a risk assessment on client application landscape and identify
1. Critical applications and functions
2. Risk associated with each critical application function
3. Architectural security requirements to secure each critical application functions
4. Client specific secure code blocks to implement security requirements
5. Secure test plans to verify risk has been mitigated




• Tool administrators use the Internal mapping screen to
  1. Create json files of the organisation specific risks, security requirements, secure code blocks and tests
  2. Import these into the SCAT

      See how to import organisations specific risks, security requirements, secure code blocks and tests
  

Licensing

This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the link GNU Affero General Public License 3.0 as published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

Project Resources

[Installation Package]

[Source Code]

Project Leader

Michael Bergman

Classifications