The Effect of Security Education and Expertise on Security Assessments: the Case of Software Vulnerabilities

In spite of the growing importance of software security and the industry demand for more cyber security expertise in the workforce, the effect of security education and experience on the ability to assess complex software security problems has only been recently investigated. As proxy for the full range of software security skills, we considered the problem of assessing the severity of software vulnerabilities by means of a structured analysis methodology widely used in industry (i.e. the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (\CVSS) v3), and designed a study to compare how accurately individuals with background in information technology but different professional experience and education in cyber security are able to assess the severity of software vulnerabilities. Our results provide some structural insights into the complex relationship between education or experience of assessors and the quality of their assessments. In particular we find that individual characteristics matter more than professional experience or formal education; apparently it is the \emph{combination} of skills that one owns (including the actual knowledge of the system under study), rather than the specialization or the years of experience, to influence more the assessment quality. Similarly, we find that the overall advantage given by professional expertise significantly depends on the composition of the individual security skills as well as on the available information.Comment: Presented at the Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (WEIS 2018), Innsbruck, Austria, June 201

Collaborative Application Security Testing for DevSecOps: An Empirical Analysis of Challenges, Best Practices and Tool Support

DevSecOps is a software development paradigm that places a high emphasis on the culture of collaboration between developers (Dev), security (Sec) and operations (Ops) teams to deliver secure software continuously and rapidly. Adopting this paradigm effectively, therefore, requires an understanding of the challenges, best practices and available solutions for collaboration among these functional teams. However, collaborative aspects related to these teams have received very little empirical attention in the DevSecOps literature. Hence, we present a study focusing on a key security activity, Application Security Testing (AST), in which practitioners face difficulties performing collaborative work in a DevSecOps environment. Our study made novel use of 48 systematically selected webinars, technical talks and panel discussions as a data source to qualitatively analyse software practitioner discussions on the most recent trends and emerging solutions in this highly evolving field. We find that the lack of features that facilitate collaboration built into the AST tools themselves is a key tool-related challenge in DevSecOps. In addition, the lack of clarity related to role definitions, shared goals, and ownership also hinders Collaborative AST (CoAST). We also captured a range of best practices for collaboration (e.g., Shift-left security), emerging communication methods (e.g., ChatOps), and new team structures (e.g., hybrid teams) for CoAST. Finally, our study identified several requirements for new tool features and specific gap areas for future research to provide better support for CoAST in DevSecOps.Comment: Submitted to the Empirical Software Engineering journal_v

Economic Factors of Vulnerability Trade and Exploitation

Cybercrime markets support the development and diffusion of new attack technologies, vulnerability exploits, and malware. Whereas the revenue streams of cyber attackers have been studied multiple times in the literature, no quantitative account currently exists on the economics of attack acquisition and deployment. Yet, this understanding is critical to characterize the production of (traded) exploits, the economy that drives it, and its effects on the overall attack scenario. In this paper we provide an empirical investigation of the economics of vulnerability exploitation, and the effects of market factors on likelihood of exploit. Our data is collected first-handedly from a prominent Russian cybercrime market where the trading of the most active attack tools reported by the security industry happens. Our findings reveal that exploits in the underground are priced similarly or above vulnerabilities in legitimate bug-hunting programs, and that the refresh cycle of exploits is slower than currently often assumed. On the other hand, cybercriminals are becoming faster at introducing selected vulnerabilities, and the market is in clear expansion both in terms of players, traded exploits, and exploit pricing. We then evaluate the effects of these market variables on likelihood of attack realization, and find strong evidence of the correlation between market activity and exploit deployment. We discuss implications on vulnerability metrics, economics, and exploit measurement.Comment: 17 pages, 11 figures, 14 table

Do Bugs Foreshadow Vulnerabilities? A Study of the Chromium Project

As developers face ever-increasing pressure to engineer secure software, researchers are building an understanding of security-sensitive bugs (i.e. vulnerabilities). Research into mining software repositories has greatly increased our understanding of software quality via empirical study of bugs. However, conceptually vulnerabilities are different from bugs: they represent abusive functionality as opposed to wrong or insufficient functionality commonly associated with traditional, non-security bugs. In this study, we performed an in-depth analysis of the Chromium project to empirically examine the relationship between bugs and vulnerabilities. We mined 374,686 bugs and 703 post-release vulnerabilities over five Chromium releases that span six years of development. Using logistic regression analysis, we examined how various categories of pre-release bugs and review experiences (e.g. stability, compatibility, etc.) are associated with post-release vulnerabilities. While we found statistically significant correlations between our metrics and post-release vulnerabilities, we also found the association to be weak. Number of features, SLOC, and number of pre-release security bugs are, in general, more closely associated with post-release vulnerabilities than any of our non-security bug categories. In a separate analysis, we found that the files with highest defect density did not intersect with the files of highest vulnerability density. These results indicate that bugs and vulnerabilities are empirically dissimilar groups, warranting the need for more research targeting vulnerabilities specifically

Measuring the accuracy of software vulnerability assessments: experiments with students and professionals

Assessing the risks of software vulnerabilities is a key process of software development and security management. This assessment requires to consider multiple factors (technical features, operational environment, involved assets, status of the vulnerability lifecycle, etc.) and may depend from the assessor's knowledge and skills. In this work, we tackle with an important part of this problem by measuring the accuracy of technical vulnerability assessments by assessors with dierent level and type of knowledge. We report an experiment to compare how accurately students with dierent technical education and security professionals are able to assess the severity of software vulnerabilities with the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (v3) industry methodology. Our results could be useful for increasing awareness about the intrinsic subtleties of vulnerability risk assessment and possibly better compliance with regulations. With respect to academic education, professional training and human resources selections our work suggests that measuring the effects of knowledge and expertise on the accuracy of software security assessments is feasible albeit not easy