Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security IT

The Rise of Software Security 79

Gunkerty Jeb writes with an article in Threatpost. From the article: "Perhaps no segment of the security industry has evolved more in the last decade than the discipline of software security. At the start of the 2000s, software security was a small, arcane field that often was confused with security software. But several things happened in the early part of the decade that set in motion a major shift in the way people built software ... To get some perspective on how far things have come, Threatpost spoke with Gary McGraw of Cigital about the evolution of software security since 2001."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Rise of Software Security

Comments Filter:
  • by hesaigo999ca ( 786966 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @05:05PM (#37391766) Homepage Journal

    Let's ask a nobody, as compared to say a full fledged AV engineer who has been in the field since day 1....nothing like getting your information from the source....
    oh wait, I get it now, this was just blatant publicity for this upcoming software security firm that needs to make a name for themselves....remind me next time I need to become someone, I should get someone to post on /. a story on me and my company....

    Dont look for a sig, I aint got one...

  • Mod parent up. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by khasim ( 1285 ) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @05:22PM (#37391930)

    TFA is nothing but name dropping and unsupportable claims.

    So in 2001, C was a disaster, C++ was a disaster, Java was getting better, .NET was getting even better.

    Yeah. Right. Check your dates. If you were using .NET in 2001 ...

    You can write secure code in almost any language. It is up to the skill of the coder. Look at the various *BSD's out there.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @05:35PM (#37392048)

    Claiming that C and C++ are disasters from the standpoint of security is like saying that the IP protocol is a disaster from the standpoint of reliable transmission of data streams, or that HTTP is a disaster from the standpoint of security. Arguably so, but only if you don't supplement them with any other layers or tools.

  • real disaster (Score:4, Interesting)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @06:22PM (#37392448) Homepage Journal

    the disasters of beginning of this century include XML. In everything. "Agile" development. IE6 and ActiveX controls. IBM Lotus Notes. "Visual" programming, especially mixed with UML and RUP. Passing parameters from URLs directly to database layers as input without sanitation. Not checking data structure boundaries and sizes. Using root for everything, this one is especially nice when combined with a password, that is used for everything in a corporation. Especially when password is some variation of "adminpass1". Buying more and more BEA/Oracle licenses to set up more and more nodes where the real speed problem could be solved with very little code on a single machine, but obviously that's not sexy and doesn't buy perks. Having no testing cycles, never having enough testing, doing irrelevant testing (this even includes automated testing, which can be huge, but still irrelevant).

    Producing huge meaningless documents that end up copied in email to everybody, but eventually don't get read by anybody who they should address, having template "Architecture", where past documents are copied, whatever names are replaced, no thought is given to the project and all the details are left over to the team for the time of implementation. This, especially when combined with time lines that give 80% time to meetings/architecture, 12% time to all of the development combined and then whatever remains is running around like chickens with heads cut off, from users to testers to admins, trying to get any of it working.

    All of the above and more, much more are disasters.

    But the real disaster here is that pathetic article that this story refers to.

  • by ka9dgx ( 72702 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @08:26PM (#37393364) Homepage Journal

    I keep watch on "security" threads like this one, hoping to find sanity in at least one answer prior to mine.... and keep getting disappointed.

    You're all wrong, so far.

    Why? It's simple, it's not an application programming issue, it's an Operating System design issue.

    The default permit environment present in everything except IBM's VM is the root cause of 99% of our problems.

    Instead of giving each PROCESS a list of resources and permissions, Linux, OS-X, Windows, and pretty much everything else, does it at the USER level. (Yes, I know about app-armor, but that's a special case)

    This means that all of the defenses are pointed in the wrong direction. (Imagine building a fort with 10 foot thick perimeter wall as its sole defense in the age of paratroopers and helicopters to get an idea of the scale of the problem).

    It doesn't matter how careful or professionally trained the application programmers are, nor how safe the programming language used to write the application is, when the OS isn't even designed to limit what they can do. All programs have bugs, you shouldn't have to trust them not to have them.

    Now, those skills and language enhancements are useful for building the operating system, especially when constructing the micro-kernel to run everything, so it's not wasted effort.

    I predict we'll see stories like this for at least 10 more years, regardless of the effort or money put in, because we haven't changed our approach yet. It's going to take a few more years until the cognitive dissonance gets loud enough in peoples heads to prompt them to find a better OS, and a few more years to actually have something reasonably solid available. Until then, buckle up... it's going to be a VERY bumpy ride.

  • Re:CapROS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ka9dgx ( 72702 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2011 @08:58PM (#37393606) Homepage Journal

    The reason things like CapROS haven't caught on is inertia... it's a huge pain in the ass to move things to a different desktop, let alone a completely different operating system, where you have to rewrite things, and adjust to a whole new set of annoyances.

    The IBM VM model of things is a pure capability model, you give RAM, DISK, and I/O to a virtual machine, and it can't exceed it's authority. Of course the granularity is a bit rough when you have to do it in terms of disk systems instead of specific files, folders, etc. The need to have a system admin set things up, which isn't very user friendly either, so it's clearly not the exact way things will end up when capabilities go mainstream.

    I see the easiest way as looking just like Windows, Linux, etc... except the shortcut to an application also includes a list of files, resources, quotas, etc... this would allow things like Accounting Applications which can't access the internet (unless you change their settings), etc.

    Eventually, people will figure it out, but it's going to be a LONG wait. In the meanwhile, the insecurity of everything will get used to sell a lot of software, firewalls, etc... and the worst part is it offers the perfect excuse for filtering and censoring the internet.

    I'm glad to see you here... now there are at least 2 of us. ;-)

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.

Working...