Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 3, 2020. It is now read-only.

Add Owasp category and STRIDE category to findings #533

Open
Manonnnn4 opened this issue Nov 8, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Add Owasp category and STRIDE category to findings #533

Manonnnn4 opened this issue Nov 8, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@Manonnnn4
Copy link

Please fill out the Bug Form or Feature Request Below


Feature Request

It would really be nice to be able to link the owasp top 10 category to a finding, and to use the STRIDE categories instead of DREAD.

Example Use Case

"As a user with a bit of knowledge about owasp, I would like to know in which owasp category the findings falls, so it will be easier to find information about it."

@Manonnnn4 Manonnnn4 changed the title Add Owasp catedory and STRIDE category to findings Add Owasp category and STRIDE category to findings Nov 8, 2018
@BuffaloWill
Copy link
Contributor

@Manonnnn4 Would the OWASP Top 10 category be used as a part of a generated report? If so, how would this appear? I ask because this could be something better fit for a plug-in (https://github.com/SerpicoProject/SerpicoPlugins) rather than implementing in the main code.

@Manonnnn4
Copy link
Author

Manonnnn4 commented Nov 13, 2018

I'd like to report per finding which owasp top 10 category it falls under (just like I give the risk of the finding, or the DREAD score), so like:


  • Risk = high
  • remediation effort = low
  • Owasp category = A6 - security misconfiguration

  • Finding, remediation, etc.

The nice thing of adding it in this way, is that I can then also group my findings per owasp top 10 category (group all security misconfigurations together for example), instead of grouping them per risklevel like I do now, e.g. instead of using ¬report/findings_list/findings:::risk>2¬ I can use:
¬report/findings_list/findings:::owasp_cat=1¬

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants