A Security Patch For Web Development Frameworks

OWASP DC panel debates ways to make security part of the application framework

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- OWASP AppSec DC 2010 -- A panel of application security experts here yesterday concurred that secure Web development is broken and debated ways to fix the frameworks so developers can write more secure applications.
What if some frameworks had security features built into them that wouldnt make security an afterthought? says Rafal Los, Web application security evangelist for the HP Software and Solutions business at HP. What if we fixed the frameworks so it was harder to write insecure code, and that you had to [actually] purposely write code insecurely to make it insecure?
Developers dont purposely write their Web apps insecurely -- they are just victims of the tools they must use, according to the panel, which was headed by Josh Abraham, security consultant with Rapid7. And with more developers using prebuilt development frameworks, such as JSF, Struts, Spring, and DWR, that werent designed with security in mind, its no wonder so many Web apps are riddled with security holes, according to the premise of the panel.
Its not that there are no efforts to help developers write more secure code: Aside from developer training efforts, theres OWASPs
Enterprise Security API (ESAPI)
, an open-source Web app security control library aimed at making secure code simpler to write.
But ESAPI hasnt been as widely adopted thus far as its creators had hoped, and training doesnt scale, according to the panel. Chris Eng, senior director of research at Veracode, says his firm rarely sees organizations using it. ESAPI has been around a long time, but very rarely do we run into [companies] using it. Why? It has fairly good protections. If its baking these [protections] into the framework, why hasnt it caught on?
Eng said hes in favor of improving the development frameworks. He posed the possibility of a framework being built to prevent developers from writing insecure code at all: It is possible to fix things in the framework, but what if you could make it impossible for developers to write something insecure -- without them ever having to know about security? Eng said.
Rapid7s Abraham agreed that the ideal would be for the frameworks to make it easier to build in security and harder to write insecure code.
But its not so simple to retrofit legacy code, the panelists said. Back-porting is a losing battle, Abraham said.
It makes more sense to build security from the ground up in new generations of frameworks, the panelists agreed.
As for more extreme approaches, such as holding developers legally accountable for writing insecure code, HPs Los said litigation isnt the answer.
Another option would be to somehow make developers accountable for their coding within the organization. In my ideal world, developers would have to have secure code as one of their MBOs [Management By Objectives measurements], Veracodes Eng said.
Have a comment on this story? Please click Discuss below. If youd like to contact
Dark Readings
editors directly,
send us a message
.

Last News
▸ ArcSight prepares for future at user conference post HP acquisition. ◂ Discovered: 07/01/2025 Category: security	▸ Samsung Epic 4G: First To Use Media Hub ◂ Discovered: 07/01/2025 Category: security	▸ Many third-party software fails security tests ◂ Discovered: 07/01/2025 Category: security

**Cyber Security Categories**
Google Dorks Database	Exploits Vulnerability	Exploit Shellcodes

CVE List

Tools/Apps

News/Aarticles

Phishing Database

Deepfake Detection

Trends/Statistics & Live Infos

Tags:
A Security Patch For Web Development Frameworks