Not surprising. Last time I looked, attack surface is subjective. McCabe is not. BTW, McCabe's Cyclomatic complexity boils down to 85% lines of code and 15% data flow if you do a principal component analysis on it. Just throw the code in the box and turn the crank. Then discard the results and you're done!
gem company www.cigital.com podcast www.cigital.com/silverbullet blog www.cigital.clom/justiceleague book www.swsec.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven M. Christey Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 1:15 PM To: Secure Coding Subject: Re: [SC-L] Microsoft Pushes Secure, Quality Code Interesting that attack surface isn't included, given that Microsoft was one of the earliest advocates of attack surface, a metric that is likely strongly associated with the number of input-related vulnerabilities. It's probably hard to do perfectly, though, especially if any third-party APIs are involved. Are there any tools out there that try to measure attack surface? Has anybody had any experience in trying to apply it? - Steve _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com) as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com) as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community. _______________________________________________
