LinuxSecurity.com
Share your story
The central voice for Linux and Open Source security news
Home News Topics Advisories HOWTOs Features Newsletters About Register

Welcome!
Sign up!
EnGarde Community
Login
Polls
What is the most important Linux security technology?
 
Advisories
Community
Linux Events
Linux User Groups
Link to Us
Security Center
Book Reviews
Security Dictionary
Security Tips
SELinux
White Papers
Featured Blogs
All About Linux
DanWalsh LiveJournal
Securitydistro
Latest Newsletters
Linux Security Week: May 14th, 2012
Linux Advisory Watch: May 10th, 2012
Subscribe
LinuxSecurity Newsletters
E-mail:
Choose Lists:
About our Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Get the LinuxSecurity news you want faster with RSS
Powered By

  
Whitebox Security Testing Using Code Scanning Print E-mail
User Rating:      How can I rate this item?
Source: Dr. Dobbs Journal - Posted by Eric Lubow   
Security Projects Whitebox testing is notoriously difficult to do. Without automatic code scanning tools, scanning the source code requires a keen eye, concentration and an enormous amount of time to scan each line for security vulnerabilities. As intruders become more sophisticated at finding security vulnerabilities and writing exploitative code, it becomes more necessary to take every precaution before shipping software.These precautions can range from security training throughout the security development lifecycle (SDLC) to using tools such as source code scanners and vulnerability scanners.

Last year, more vulnerabilities were reported in shipping software than any previous year, according to CERT. Nearly 6000 new vulnerabilities surfaced in shipped software, and the state of the industry seems grim. Despite attempts by the larger and more proactive players in the industry, like Microsoft, IBM, HP and CISCO, to incorporate security in all phases of the SDLC, the number of reported vulnerabilities continues to increase. Where are the greatest weaknesses in software security? Were nearly 2000 more vulnerabilities discovered because security trainers did not transfer their knowledge properly? Or are hackers getting better at discovering these vulnerabilities? Do software corporations rely too much on perimeter defenses, such as firewalls, intrusion detection systems, deep packet inspectors and anti virus solutions? Is it just sheer complacency? Or is it really a combination of all of these things and more?

Read this full article at Dr. Dobbs Journal

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment!

 
< Prev   Next >
    
Partner

 

Latest Features
Password guessing with Medusa 2.0
Password guessing as an attack vector
Squid and Digest Authentication
Squid and Basic Authentication
Demystifying the Chinese Hacking Industry: Earning 6 Million a Night
Free Online security course (LearnSIA) - A Call for Help
What You Need to Know About Linux Rootkits
Review: A Practical Guide to Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux - Fifth Edition
Using the sec-wall Security Proxy
sec-wall: Open Source Security Proxy
Yesterday's Edition
New Nmap Probes IPv6 Networks
Anatomy of a hack: 6 separate bugs needed to bring down Google browser
Sony PS Vita Hacking Expands With Homebrew Loader
Partner Sponsor

Community | HOWTOs | Blogs | Features | Book Reviews | Networking
 Security Projects |  Latest News |  Newsletters |  SELinux |  Privacy |  Home
 Hardening |   About Us |   Advertise |   Legal Notice |   RSS |   Guardian Digital
(c)Copyright 2012 Guardian Digital, Inc. All rights reserved.