SDL and the CWE/SANS Top 25

SDL and the CWE/SANS Top 25

  • Comments 1

Bryan here.  The security community has been buzzing since SANS and MITRE’s joint announcement earlier this month of their list of the Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors. Now, I don’t want to get into a debate in this blog about whether this new list will become the new de facto standard for analyzing security vulnerabilities (or indeed, whether it already has become the new standard). Instead, I’d like to present an overview of how the Microsoft SDL maps to the CWE/SANS list, just like we did with the SDL/OWASP Top Ten mapping last May.

Michael and I have written up a detailed item-by-item analysis of the SDL coverage of the Top 25 and posted it on the microsoft.com Download Center. We believe that the results tend to endorse the validity of the SDL, given that the Top 25 were developed independently and the SDL does quite well at enabling us to root them out of the software we deliver. We encourage you to download the analysis white paper and make use of it in your own organization: we’ve published guidance around every manual process described in the paper, and we’ve also made many of the same SDL-required security tools that we use internally free for you to download and use as well.

Below is a summary of how the SDL maps to the Top 25 vulnerabilities; as you can see the SDL covers every one of the Top 25 vulnerabilities, and all but two of them (race conditions and download of code without integrity check) are covered by multiple SDL requirements. I’m also particularly pleased to note that we have tools to prevent or detect more than 75% of the Top 25.

CWE

Title

Education?

Manual Process?

Tools?

Threat Model?

20

Improper Input Validation

Y

Y

Y

Y

116

Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output

Y

Y

Y

 

89

Failure to Preserve SQL Query Structure (aka SQL Injection)

Y

Y

Y

 

79

Failure to Preserve Web Page Structure (aka Cross-Site Scripting)

Y

Y

Y

 

78

Failure to Preserve OS Command Structure (aka OS Command Injection)

Y

 

Y

 

319

Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information

Y

 

 

Y

352

Cross-site Request Forgery (aka CSRF)

Y

 

Y

 

362

Race Condition

Y

 

 

 

209

Error Message Information Leak

Y

Y

Y

 

119

Failure to Constrain Memory Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

Y

Y

Y

 

642

External Control of Critical State Data

Y

 

 

Y

73

External Control of File Name or Path

Y

Y

Y

 

426

Untrusted Search Path

Y

 

Y

 

94

Failure to Control Generation of Code (aka 'Code Injection')

Y

Y

 

 

494

Download of Code Without Integrity Check

 

 

 

Y

404

Improper Resource Shutdown or Release

Y

 

Y

 

665

Improper Initialization

Y

 

Y

 

682

Incorrect Calculation

Y

 

Y

 

285

Improper Access Control (Authorization)

Y

Y

 

Y

327

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

Y

Y

Y

 

259

Hard-Coded Password

Y

Y

Y

Y

732

Insecure Permission Assignment for Critical Resource

Y

Y

 

 

330

Use of Insufficiently Random Values

Y

Y

Y

 

250

Execution with Unnecessary Privileges

Y

Y

 

Y

602

Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security

Y

 

 

Y

Comments
  • CWE-89: Failure to Preserve SQL Query Structure (aka 'SQL Injection') pochodzi wprost z 2009 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors. Osobiście bardzo się cieszę z opublikowania tego typu dokumentu, zalecenia w nim zawarte można wprost wyko

Page 1 of 1 (1 items)
Leave a Comment
  • Please add 5 and 1 and type the answer here:
  • Post