Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Discussion about excluded cheat sheet from the migration #13

Closed
righettod opened this issue Feb 16, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed

Discussion about excluded cheat sheet from the migration #13

righettod opened this issue Feb 16, 2019 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
MIGRATION Issue about a task related to the migration of the project to GitHub.
Milestone

Comments

@righettod
Copy link
Member

righettod commented Feb 16, 2019

The following cheat sheets are subject to discussion about the need to be migrated or discarded.

The reason of my decision to open the discussion on these cheat sheets is related to either the quality or either the added value of the content provided.

Content Security Policy

I think that the content of this CS is too old and needs to be deeply refactored and I think they currently do not bring added value to a dev team.

✅ Refactored and released by @ThunderSon

PL SQL Security

I think that the content of this CS need to more thorough and I think they currently do not bring added value to a dev team.

Secure SDLC

I think that this CS is not needed because the OWASP Open SAMM project is dedicated to this topic.

Security Testing

The CS do not add any added value and the content is too light.

Web Application Security Testing

I think that this CS is not needed because the OWASP Testing Guide project is dedicated to this topic and there this project for a checklist about the OTG.

Web Service Security Testing

Same remarks than for Web Application Security Testing CS.

OWASP TOP 10

I think that this CS is not needed because the OWASP ASVS project and the OWASP Proactive Controls project are dedicated to help developers. Moreover, OWASP TOP 10 should only be used for awareness operation...

Secure Coding

I think that this CS is not needed because the OWASP ASVS project should be used for code review operation

XSS Filter Evasion

The CS project is oriented defense and prevention. This CS is oriented attack so I think it must be re-classified into the Attack category of the OWASP wiki.

Feel free to post a comment, it's the reason of existence of this post 😃

@righettod righettod added the MIGRATION Issue about a task related to the migration of the project to GitHub. label Feb 16, 2019
@righettod righettod added this to the Roadmap 2019 milestone Feb 16, 2019
@righettod righettod self-assigned this Feb 16, 2019
@mackowski
Copy link
Collaborator

I agree with your judgment. In my opinion Content Security Policy and PL SQL Security should be refactored and updated. Rest excluded CSs should be deleted.

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

righettod commented Feb 18, 2019 via email

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

I have added a comment for the XSS Filter Evasion Cheat Sheet.

@mackowski
Copy link
Collaborator

I have problem with XSS Filter Evasion Cheat Sheet because as you mentioned this is offensive side but all other CSs are about defence. The question for me is do we want to have attack CSs at all?

@jmanico
Copy link
Member

jmanico commented Feb 21, 2019 via email

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

righettod commented Feb 21, 2019 via email

@ThunderSon
Copy link
Contributor

I agree on the above.
For XSS attacks, there are 2 dedicated pages on the OWASP website, one being for WAF evasion.
About the security testing, what is the exact goal for it? What will be the main target for it? Security testing is a vague term compared to the specific fields.
About the CSP CS, how do you compare it to https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/CSP ? What should be the key differences?

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

righettod commented Mar 1, 2019 via email

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

@ThunderSon have started to refactor the CSP CS.

@righettod
Copy link
Member Author

I close the issue: More than a month without other reaction.
We can reopen it in case of need.
So, to resume only the CSP one will be refactored and included.

otkd added a commit to otkd/CheatSheetSeries that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2024
- Following existing syntax adds Rule OWASP#13 covering Docker Secrets

Signed-off-by: otkd <[email protected]>
jmanico pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 2, 2024
…1301)

* chore(Docker): compose v2 & networking update

- Updates Docker Compose references to use v2 `docker compose` command
- Change ICC recommendation to use network policies  instead of disabling

Signed-off-by: otkd <[email protected]>

* feat(Docker): add Docker Secrets rule

- Following existing syntax adds Rule #13 covering Docker Secrets

Signed-off-by: otkd <[email protected]>

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Shlomo Zalman Heigh <[email protected]>

* feat(Docker): add Supply Chain Security & Podman

- Merges the linting and container scanning section into a single rule
- Fixes issue in proposed solution in Rule 10 doesn’t actually help implement the suggestion
- Expand rootless mode
- Add high level practices covering Docker supply chain security
- Add Podman as an alternative to Docker for secure defaults

Signed-off-by: otkd <[email protected]>

---------

Signed-off-by: otkd <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Shlomo Zalman Heigh <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
MIGRATION Issue about a task related to the migration of the project to GitHub.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants