Home > Information Security Tips > Risk Management Strategies > New evaluation criteria for Web application security scanners
Information Security Tips:
EMAIL THIS
 TIPS & NEWSLETTERS TOPICS 

RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

New evaluation criteria for Web application security scanners


Paul F. Roberts, Contributor
10.27.2009
Rating: --- (out of 5)


Digg This!    StumbleUpon Toolbar StumbleUpon    Bookmark with Delicious Del.icio.us   


In my work as a technology analyst, I spend an awful lot of time talking to technology vendors and their customers. These days, both seem to be bringing up the same topic over and over again -- namely, Web application security. There are plenty of reasons for this -- I could fill a column just listing them. One big reason, of course, is the proliferation of Web-based applications in the enterprise, for both business (Salesforce.com Inc.) and pleasure (Facebook).

The other reason, of course, is compliance. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard was among the first to take a strong stand on Web application security, requiring PCI-covered entities to either conduct Web application code reviews or deploy an application layer firewall to protect all Web-facing applications. But Web application security has an effect on other industry and government-sponsored regulations, as well, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability and Federal Information Security Management acts. As more enterprise computing (and enterprise data) migrates to public and private clouds in the coming years, security of Web-based user and management interfaces that front them will become even more critical.

No surprise, then, that both open source and commercial Web scanners have popped up in great numbers in recent years, as security vendors rushed into the market offering compliance-focused Web application scanning services. As with other areas of the IT security market, however, a lack of cross-vendor standards has made apples-to-apples comparisons of Web application scanners difficult. Jeremiah Grossman, chief technology officer of WhiteHat Security Inc., notes that impartial information regarding Web application testing products is hard to come by -- especially with cuts to the budgets of trade publications, which have curtailed (or eliminated) their test lab operations.

Now a new set of guidelines from the Web Application Security Consortium (WASC), a collection of vendors, Web application security practitioners and enterprise end users, may give IT security and compliance professionals a valuable tool for assessing Web security. The Web Application Security Scanner Evaluation Criteria (WASSEC) is a detailed guide to the many features commonly available in Web application scanners. The document is intended to help enterprises and IT professionals decide which features are common to Web application scanners, and which are important for the job at hand. The document was the product of collaboration among top players in the Web application security space -- companies like nCircle Network Inc., IBM, Hewlett-Packard Co., McAfee Inc., Breach Security Inc. and Rapid7 LLC.

Brian Shura, director of penetration testing at AppSec Consulting Inc. in San Jose and a project leader at WASC, told me the evaluation criteria are designed to give potential customers a way to push beyond often conflicting marketing claims for Web application scanners. It's also meant to provide a basis for doing bake-offs and other evaluations.

As more enterprise computing … migrates to public and private clouds in the coming years, security of Web-based user and management interfaces that front them will become even more critical.
WASSEC represents a consensus on the features that potential buyers might expect to find in a Web application scanner. It's up to potential buyers to figure out which features matter the most to them and how to weigh the offerings of various vendors, Grossman said.

The WASSEC document breaks Web application scanners down by their key elements: Web crawling, parsing (of URLs, forms, comments), support for various Web protocols and forms of Web authentication, session management and testing, as well as command and control and reporting features. The document provides guidance for evaluating these various functional areas. For example: WASSEC notes that Web application scanners should be able to extract and analyze content from Adobe Flash-based applications, a common platform for creating rich client features for Internet-based applications. What WASSEC doesn't do is make value judgments about which features are "must-haves."

As you've read here before, security scans are not enough. Simply running a vulnerability scan on your Web applications and seeing what the scanner spits out doesn't make you compliant (or secure, for that matter). Grossman noted that WASSEC's list of features won't obviate actual testing and product bake-offs. "Everybody is going to have the same feature set, but some will work better than others. For example, you can check for cross-site scripting vulnerabilities, but how good are you at it?"

Added Shura, "There are a lot of misconceptions in the scanning area. A lot of people think these are push-the-button tools. But if want to do a thorough job, you need training and people who are trained to use scanners in a way that optimizes their effectiveness."

WASSEC isn't the only resource out there. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, among other organizations, has attempted to provide metrics and tool evaluation criteria for Web application scanners. But enterprises concerned about the security of their Web applications would do well to take an inventory of their public and internal websites, Grossman advised. Consider how valuable those sites are and what level of attacker you wish to defend against -- from automated "bot" attacks to a determined hacker targeting your organization and Web infrastructure, in particular. The level of protection and security afforded your websites should be commensurate with the level of attack you think you're likely to face, he said.

Paul Roberts is a senior analyst at The 451 Group in New York. Let us know what you think about the story; email: editor@searchcompliance.com.


Rate this Tip
To rate tips, you must be a member of SearchSecurity.IN.
Register now to start rating these tips. Log in if you are already a member.




Digg This!    StumbleUpon Toolbar StumbleUpon    Bookmark with Delicious Del.icio.us   



RELATED CONTENT
Application and Web threat defenses
Considering two-factor authentication? Do cost, risk analysis
Clientless SSL VPN vulnerability and Web browser protection
11 application security tweaks for a secure SDLC
Fraudulent mobile applications will threaten mobile banking security
Mobile Reputation Security prototype from Symantec: A closer look
A botnet and rootkit removal 101
Microsoft warns that IE zero-day vulnerability causes data leakage
What to do with network penetration test results
Network discovery and the Simple Network Management Protocol
Protecting enterprise networks from new mobile application downloads

Hacking countermeasures
Two factor authentication gets token agnostic at Central Bank of India
Considering two-factor authentication? Do cost, risk analysis
PCI tokenization push promising but premature, experts say
Clientless SSL VPN vulnerability and Web browser protection
How to perform an Active Directory health check
Information rights management helps L&T protect its knowhow
Firewall audit tools aid compliance
11 application security tweaks for a secure SDLC
Zeus Trojan continues reign infecting 74,000 PCs in global botnet
Fraud risk management is key to avoid Wipro-like incidents

Vulnerability and patch management
Clientless SSL VPN vulnerability and Web browser protection
Cloud Security Alliance releases top cloud computing security threats
RAM-scraping attacks are a rising -- but preventable -- threat
Microsoft warns that IE zero-day vulnerability causes data leakage
What to do with network penetration test results
Network discovery and the Simple Network Management Protocol
Best practices to secure wireless networks
Microsoft issues advisory on Internet Explorer zero-day
Another PDF attack targets Adobe zero-day vulnerability
Five security themes to watch in 2010

RELATED GLOSSARY TERMS
Terms from Whatis.com − the technology online dictionary
man-in-the-middle (MitM) attack  (SearchSecurityIN.com)

RELATED RESOURCES
2020software.com, trial software downloads for accounting software, ERP software, CRM software and business software systems
Search Bitpipe.com for the latest white papers and business webcasts
Whatis.com, the online computer dictionary

DISCLAIMER: Our Tips Exchange is a forum for you to share technical advice and expertise with your peers and to learn from other enterprise IT professionals. TechTarget provides the infrastructure to facilitate this sharing of information. However, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or validity of the material submitted. You agree that your use of the Ask The Expert services and your reliance on any questions, answers, information or other materials received through this Web site is at your own risk.

HomeNewsTopicsITKnowledge ExchangeTipsMultimediaWhite Papers
About Us  |  Contact Us  |  For Advertisers  |  For Business Partners  |  Site Index  |  RSS
SEARCH 
TechTarget provides technology professionals with the information they need to perform their jobs - from developing strategy, to making cost-effective purchase decisions and managing their organizations' technology projects - with its network of technology-specific websites, events and online magazines.

TechTarget Corporate Web Site  |  Media Kits  |  Site Map




All Rights Reserved, Copyright 2009 - 2010, TechTarget | Read our Privacy Policy
  TechTarget - The IT Media ROI Experts