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

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
  

SCAT has the following governance objectives implemented by the following “first line of defense” functions

Benefits realisation: Enabling development teams to deliver at speed

1. Promoting compliance to security requirements
2. Minimising the impact of audit and assurance

Risk optimisation: Minimise the negative and maximise the positive consequences

1. Informing risk based decision making

Resource optimisation: Predictable, repeatable and consistent level of security across all teams

1. Integrating security into the software development process

• Understand the security requirement: The tool maintains the following internal mapping allowing organisations to translate complex security requirements into code level and testing guidance
1. Risks mapped to technologies and secure code requirements
2. Secure code requirements (OWASP ASVS) mapped to secure code building block
3. Secure test plans (OWASP testing guide) mapped to risks
4. The second mapping is lifted from OWASP secure knowledge framework and duplicated in the SCAT. I hope to link with the SKF and remove the duplicate functionality from the SCAT tool
• Verify understanding: The tool also makes use of OWASP ZAP basic scan to scan localhost for vulnerabilities, confirming the correct implementation of security requirements

• In the testing and approval phase SCAT allows testers to stores testing evidence against the critical application function and its associated risk. Providing traceability through requirements and centrally storing and publishing test evidence

• For each application critical function, SCAT shows
1. The risks that impact that application critical function
2. Security requirements and secure code block to protect against the risk
3. Test evidence proving risk has been mitigated to within tolerance
• Allowing risk teams see levels of exposure, easily compare it to tolerance levels. And prioritise and coordinate mitigation activities across teams and the whole application landscape

• SCAT wraps security theory, best practices and requirements into set of single purpose security screens. Then plots each of those screens to a specific software development phase
• Plotting security screens to specific software development phases provides development teams with concise information when and how they need it

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