Re: [SC-L] Security in QA is more than exploits

2009-02-05 Thread Andy Steingruebl
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Paco Hope wrote: > > Andy also said "I think we lose something when we start saying 'everything > is > relative.'" I think we lose something more important if we try to impose > abolutes: we lose the connection to the business. No business operates on > absolutes a

Re: [SC-L] Security in QA is more than exploits

2009-02-05 Thread Paco Hope
> For starters I believe you misinterpreted my comments on QA. I was in > no way slamming their abilities. With this in mind comments below. Sorry about that. I am sensitive to the bias. I went to a very small company once (10 people total) and as I looked around I saw offices with big LCDs (I ass

Re: [SC-L] Security in QA is more than exploits

2009-02-05 Thread Andy Steingruebl
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Paco Hope wrote: > Before anyone talks about vulnerabilities to test for, we have to figure > out what the business cares about and why. What could go wrong? Who cares? > What would the impact be? Answers to those questions drive our testing > strategy, and ultim

Re: [SC-L] Security in QA is more than exploits

2009-02-05 Thread bugtraq
For starters I believe you misinterpreted my comments on QA. I was in no way slamming their abilities. With this in mind comments below. > Before anyone talks about vulnerabilities to test for, we have to figure ou= > t what the business cares about and why. What could go wrong? Who cares? Wh= >

[SC-L] OWASP Podcast #6

2009-02-05 Thread Jim Manico
Hello SC-L I just pushed OWASP Podcast #6 live at http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Podcast_6 - an OWASP Roundtable with Brian Holyfield, Marcin Wielgoszewski, Andre Gironda and myself, Jim Manico. Our focus was WAF's. Thanks and I hope you enjoy, Jim Manico