This site is the archived OWASP Foundation Wiki and is no longer accepting Account Requests.
To view the new OWASP Foundation website, please visit https://owasp.org
Difference between revisions of "Project Information:template Access Control Rules Tester Project - Final Review - First Reviewer - D"
(New page: Clik here to return to the previous page. {| style="width:100%" border="0" align="center" ! colspan="3" align="center...) |
Santoniewicz (talk | contribs) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
1. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration [[OWASP Summer of Code 2008 Applications - Need Futher Clarifications#P022 - OWASP Access Control Rules Tester|'''the assumed ones''']], please exemplify writing down those of them that haven't been realised. | 1. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration [[OWASP Summer of Code 2008 Applications - Need Futher Clarifications#P022 - OWASP Access Control Rules Tester|'''the assumed ones''']], please exemplify writing down those of them that haven't been realised. | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | Each defined goal has been met, with the exception of the following: | ||
| + | * AcCoRuTe functionality including site spider. Basic features: Javascript (and AJAX) is interpreted by Rhino in order to get more site links; forms are filled in by operator. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is acceptable, as the application utilizes a third-party tool instead to provide this spidering feature. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | | style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | ||
2. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration [[OWASP Summer of Code 2008 Applications - Need Futher Clarifications#P022 - OWASP Access Control Rules Tester|'''the assumed ones''']], please quantify in terms of percentage. | 2. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration [[OWASP Summer of Code 2008 Applications - Need Futher Clarifications#P022 - OWASP Access Control Rules Tester|'''the assumed ones''']], please quantify in terms of percentage. | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | 100% has been attained for all goals. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | | style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | ||
3. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. | 3. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | *The document(s) should be on some sort of OWASP letterhead or word document template. | ||
| + | *In order to be release quality, the english grammar will need to be reviewed and mistakes will need to be corrected. | ||
| + | *Utilizing Wikipedia / Blogs as reference points are generally not considered credible. Is it possible to reference more credible references? | ||
| + | *The Requirements to run the tool are stated as "• At least 50 GB of available HDD space. " Is this true? | ||
| + | *When attempting to run the tool, it complained that I needed to set the JAVA_HOME environment variable, although I have run many java applications (for example Paros) within windows and have not had to use this. Is there a way around this requirement (for ease of set-up)? If not, maybe include these instructions | ||
| + | *Several of the instructions relating to setting up Burp Proxy are incorrect, as burp has updated to version 2 and changed many options. | ||
| + | **Going forward, it would be desirable to remove the dependancy of Burp Proxy. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:white" align="center"|'''PART II''' | | style="width:25%; background:white" align="center"|'''PART II''' | ||
| Line 41: | Line 53: | ||
1. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Alpha Quality''' status? | 1. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Alpha Quality''' status? | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | None | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | | style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | ||
2. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Beta Quality''' status? | 2. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Beta Quality''' status? | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | None | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | | style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | ||
3. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Release Quality''' status? | 3. Having into consideration the [[:Category:OWASP Project Assessment|OWASP Project Assessment Methodology]] which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of '''Release Quality''' status? | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | The follwong criteria of Release quality are not met: | ||
| + | * Be reasonably easy to use. This requires the future users of AcCoRuTe to submit their remarks and proposals. | ||
| + | * Include online documention built into tool (based on required user documentation). | ||
| + | * Be run through Fortify Software's open source review (if appropriate) and FindBugs. | ||
| + | |||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | | style="width:25%; background:#7B8ABD" align="center"| | ||
4. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. | 4. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. | ||
| colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | | colspan="2" style="width:75%; background:#cccccc" align="left"| | ||
| + | Comments are within the above section | ||
|} | |} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:13, 4 February 2009
Clik here to return to the previous page.
| FINAL REVIEW | ||
|---|---|---|
| PART I | ||
|
Project Deliveries & Objectives |
OWASP Access Control Rules Tester Project's Deliveries & Objectives | |
| QUESTIONS | ANSWERS | |
|
1. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration the assumed ones, please exemplify writing down those of them that haven't been realised. |
Each defined goal has been met, with the exception of the following:
This is acceptable, as the application utilizes a third-party tool instead to provide this spidering feature. | |
|
2. At what extent have the project deliveries & objectives been accomplished? Having in consideration the assumed ones, please quantify in terms of percentage. |
100% has been attained for all goals. | |
|
3. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. |
| |
| PART II | ||
|
Assessment Criteria |
||
| QUESTIONS | ANSWERS | |
|
1. Having into consideration the OWASP Project Assessment Methodology which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of Alpha Quality status? |
None | |
|
2. Having into consideration the OWASP Project Assessment Methodology which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of Beta Quality status? |
None | |
|
3. Having into consideration the OWASP Project Assessment Methodology which criteria, if any, haven’t been fulfilled in terms of Release Quality status? |
The follwong criteria of Release quality are not met:
| |
|
4. Please do use the right hand side column to provide advice and make work suggestions. |
Comments are within the above section | |