SoftwareSecurity2012/Group 6
Uit Werkplaats
Group nr. 6
Group members:
- Kostas Papagiannopoulos
- Ozgecan Payzin
- Carsten Rutz
- Mathias Morbitzer
- Arturo Cedillo Torres
all from university RU and Tu/e
Topic: V6: Output Encoding/Escaping
Our Requirements:
- V6.3 Verify that output encoding /escaping controls encode all characters not known to be safe for the intended interpreter.
- V6.4 Verify that all untrusted data that is output to SQL interpreters use parameterized interfaces, prepared statements, or are escaped properly.
Deliverables
- The log should be a chronological list of who has been doing what, with dates.
- Also useful to document decisions on who will be doing what, and by when.
- Containts information which is helpful for the analysis, ie. how the database layer is realized.
- This should discuss the results of the code scanning. Insofar as possible, put the focus on these from the point of view of the Verfication Requirements your group is looking at, but also point out, but then briefly, findings that might be interesting for other groups.
- Describe your impressions about the tools, in capabilities, limitations, etc.
- Also, did you learn anything about specific security vulnerabilities from using them?
- This should give your verdict for each requirement (Pass/Fail/Don't know) with motivation, and an indication of what you did to reach this verdict.
- Describe the sort of documentation you would have wanted about FluxBB, to make your security review easier.
- This can be design decisions, description of the overall architecture and organisation, policies used in the application, styles or guidelines adhered to in the actual coding.
- Reflect on the whole process of doing a code review, or "Application Security Verification", in the way you did.
Create more sub-pages if you want, of course
