Re: [SC-L] Source or Binary
On Jul 29, 2009, at 4:17 PM, Brad Andrews wrote: Realizing that java "binaries" hold a lot more is a mental shift that probably must be actively kept in mind. Those with only Java experience may think it is obvious, but how many developers did not start with Java and have not purged this concept from their mind. Fair enough, but understand too that a Java class file (like those in a typical jar file, which is just a fancy word for ZIP format) can be trivially decompiled into quite legible Java source. Numerous open source Java decompilers (e.g., Jode, Jad) exist that make this extremely easy. And FWIW, that's exactly how the Etisalat Blackberry software "update" was analyzed and proven to contain spyware last week. Note that, there are many options to distributing these trivially decompiled class files... Cheers, Ken van Wyk smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ 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. ___
[SC-L] Software protection
hi sc-l, Christian Collberg (an important pioneer in software protection) just published a great book called "Surreptitious Software". It's just plain good. http://www.amazon.com/Surreptitious-Software-Watermarking-Tamperproofing-Addison-Wesley/dp/0321549252 I blogged about the book on Justice League today: http://www.cigital.com/justiceleague/2009/07/29/is-software-protection-software-security/ Who agrees that software protection is part of software security? Who disagrees? gem http://www.cigital.com/~gem ___ 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. ___
[SC-L] Source or Binary
This is something where I have to watch my own mind. Figuring out a binary in C++ is very difficult. The Java is not really a binary, at least not in the "runs by itself" meaning. (Everything is (a) binary in reality, including the file holding this email.) Realizing that java "binaries" hold a lot more is a mental shift that probably must be actively kept in mind. Those with only Java experience may think it is obvious, but how many developers did not start with Java and have not purged this concept from their mind. This is a topic worth consideration when we are educating developers on secure development. At least it seems to to me! -- Brad Andrews RBA Communications CSSLP, SANS/GIAC GSEC, GCFW, GCIH, GPCI ___ 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. ___
Re: [SC-L] Integrated Dynamic and Static Scanning
Sometimes integration is a good and bad thing. I hope that my Ounce enhancement request for integration with HP Quality Center and Archer GRC doesn't get deprioritized over rebranding efforts. Likewise, this also has the potential of causing many more IBM employees than current to pay attention to the needs of secure code. -Original Message- From: sc-l-boun...@securecoding.org [mailto:sc-l-boun...@securecoding.org] On Behalf Of Brad Andrews Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 5:03 PM To: sc-l@securecoding.org Subject: [SC-L] Integrated Dynamic and Static Scanning Partnering is not the same thing as having a single owner for both tools. I also believe WhiteHat is "hire them and they do it" model, though they do put hardware in your enterprise. IIRC, you could not do all the work yourself if you had whatever components they provided. I don't think AppScan and the Ounce programs will be integrated to this extent soon, but it would be much easier, since they are both in the same company.That level of integration is highly unlikely without the "common owner" this deal provides. The end result may or may not be better, especially if they take the IBM trend of charging more rather that the simpler model Ounce was taking recently. (Though was that sustainable?) I would be interested in hearing how the Fortify/WhiteHat integration worked. -- Brad Andrews RBA Communications CSSLP, SANS/GIAC GSEC, GCFW, GCIH, GPCI > Fortify (www.fortify.com) has Partnered with WhiteHat Security > (www.whitehatsec.com) too ___ 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. ___ This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. ___ 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. ___
Re: [SC-L] IBM Acquires Ounce Labs, Inc.
All, The question of "Is my answer going to be high-enough resolution to support manual review?" or "...to support a developer fixing the problem?" comes down to "it depends". And, as we all know, I simply can't resist an "it depends" kind of subtlety. Yes, Jim, if you're doing a pure JavaSE application, and you don't care about non-standards compilers (jikes, gcj, etc.), then the source and the binary are largely equivalent (at least in terms of resolution) Larry mentioned gcj. Ease of parsing, however, is a different story (for instance, actual dependencies are way easier to pull out of a binary than the source code, whereas stack-local variable names are easiest in source). Where you care about "a whole web application" rather than a pure-Java module, you have to concern yourself with JSP and all the other MVC technologies. Placing aside the topic of XML-based configuration files, you'll want to know what (container) your JSPs were compiled to target. In this case, source code is different than binary. Similar factors sneak themselves in across the Java platform. Then you've got the world of Aspect Oriented programming. Spring and a broader class of packages that use AspectJ to weave code into your application will dramatically change the face of your binary. To get the same resolution out of your source code, you must in essence 'apply' those point cuts yourself... Getting binary-quality resolution from source code therefore means predicting what transforms will occur at what point-cut locations. I doubt highly any source-based approach will get this thoroughly correct. Finally, from the perspective of dynamic analysis, one must consider the post-compiler transforms that occur. Java involves both JIT and Hotspot (using two hotspot compilers: client and server, each of which conducting different transforms), which neither binary nor source-code-based static analysis are likely to correctly predict or account for. The binary image that runs is simply not that which is fed to classloader.defineClass[] as a bytestream. ...and (actually) finally, one of my favorite code-review techniques is to ask for both a .war/ear/jar file AND the source code. This almost invariable get's a double-take, but it's worth the trouble. How many times do you think a web.xml match between the two? What exposure might you report if they were identical? ... What might you test for If they're dramatically different? Ah... Good times, John Steven Senior Director; Advanced Technology Consulting Direct: (703) 404-5726 Cell: (703) 727-4034 Key fingerprint = 4772 F7F3 1019 4668 62AD 94B0 AE7F EEF4 62D5 F908 Blog: http://www.cigital.com/justiceleague Papers: http://www.cigital.com/papers/jsteven http://www.cigital.com Software Confidence. Achieved. On 7/28/09 4:36 PM, "ljknews" wrote: At 8:39 AM -1000 7/28/09, Jim Manico wrote: > A quick note, in the Java world (obfuscation aside), the source and > "binary" is really the same thing. The fact that Fortify analizes > source and Veracode analizes class files is a fairly minor detail. It seems to me that would only be true for those using a Java bytecode engine, not those using a Java compiler that creates machine code. ___ 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. ___
