Agreement Design
Security issues are often overlooked
When a general designer develops an agreement, functionality is usually first emphasized, while safety issues are at the last minute, or even not included in the scope of consideration. In network application environments, security issues must be paid more attention to.
Architecture is above other issues
When choosing other basic agreements, you must pay attention to whether the agreement is easy to understand and implement. Even if you have tried your best to formulate a complete agreement, if the structure is on an unstable basis, the result can be imagined. Taking the two security incidents of CERT®/CC (computer emergencyresponse team, / ) CA-2001-18 [LDAP] (/advisories/) and CA-2002-03 [SNMP] (/advisories/) as examples, the causes of the problems between the two are similar (both due to BER encoding processing problems), but the previous and subsequent incidents were nearly seven months apart, but the manufacturers did not pay attention to it.
Process issues
When designing the protocol, it may not be considered thoroughly enough, resulting in improper handling of the system when a situation occurs. Such as CERT CA-1996-21 TCP SYN Flooding (/advisories/) .
Design error
The protocol design error causes the system services to be vulnerable to failure or easily attacked.
■Software implementation
Implementation error
Even if the agreement is correctly formulated, if an error occurs when implementing the agreement, or the implementer's understanding of the agreement is wrong, it will also lead to security vulnerabilities.
Program Error
Security vulnerabilities are often caused by poor program writing habits, including common unchecked data length content, insufficient fault tolerance for input data, unchecked errors that may occur, assumption errors in the application environment, inappropriate references to modules, insufficient unchecked resources, etc.
■Personnel Operation
Homework Loss
The strictest regulations will also lead to security vulnerabilities if the operator is not well trained or fails to operate according to the manual. VeriSign, one of the most important companies in cybersecurity, has caused significant security losses due to operator negligence, which is an example (CERT CA-2001-04).
■System Maintenance
The default value is not safe
Many software or operating systems are in extremely unsafe after installation. The reason behind these preset environments is to facilitate users. Of course, users are convenient, but the users referred to here also include uninvited guests such as viruses, worms, *s, etc. No wonder "Code Red", "SirCam", "Nimda", etc. can invade online users.
Unpatched system
Generally, software will have some errors, and it is only necessary to repair it diligently to prevent the system from being damaged.
Xiao Yun's disaster occurred
Maybe you don't want to believe it, but the attack on the system is usually the system you trust. In the realm of your trust (usually this trust relationship is too weak) If there is a system that is not secure enough, this system that is not secure will soon become a springboard for the next attack. The security strength of a field is equivalent to the security strength of the most unsafe system in this field.
Security issues are often overlooked
When a general designer develops an agreement, functionality is usually first emphasized, while safety issues are at the last minute, or even not included in the scope of consideration. In network application environments, security issues must be paid more attention to.
Architecture is above other issues
When choosing other basic agreements, you must pay attention to whether the agreement is easy to understand and implement. Even if you have tried your best to formulate a complete agreement, if the structure is on an unstable basis, the result can be imagined. Taking the two security incidents of CERT®/CC (computer emergencyresponse team, / ) CA-2001-18 [LDAP] (/advisories/) and CA-2002-03 [SNMP] (/advisories/) as examples, the causes of the problems between the two are similar (both due to BER encoding processing problems), but the previous and subsequent incidents were nearly seven months apart, but the manufacturers did not pay attention to it.
Process issues
When designing the protocol, it may not be considered thoroughly enough, resulting in improper handling of the system when a situation occurs. Such as CERT CA-1996-21 TCP SYN Flooding (/advisories/) .
Design error
The protocol design error causes the system services to be vulnerable to failure or easily attacked.
■Software implementation
Implementation error
Even if the agreement is correctly formulated, if an error occurs when implementing the agreement, or the implementer's understanding of the agreement is wrong, it will also lead to security vulnerabilities.
Program Error
Security vulnerabilities are often caused by poor program writing habits, including common unchecked data length content, insufficient fault tolerance for input data, unchecked errors that may occur, assumption errors in the application environment, inappropriate references to modules, insufficient unchecked resources, etc.
■Personnel Operation
Homework Loss
The strictest regulations will also lead to security vulnerabilities if the operator is not well trained or fails to operate according to the manual. VeriSign, one of the most important companies in cybersecurity, has caused significant security losses due to operator negligence, which is an example (CERT CA-2001-04).
■System Maintenance
The default value is not safe
Many software or operating systems are in extremely unsafe after installation. The reason behind these preset environments is to facilitate users. Of course, users are convenient, but the users referred to here also include uninvited guests such as viruses, worms, *s, etc. No wonder "Code Red", "SirCam", "Nimda", etc. can invade online users.
Unpatched system
Generally, software will have some errors, and it is only necessary to repair it diligently to prevent the system from being damaged.
Xiao Yun's disaster occurred
Maybe you don't want to believe it, but the attack on the system is usually the system you trust. In the realm of your trust (usually this trust relationship is too weak) If there is a system that is not secure enough, this system that is not secure will soon become a springboard for the next attack. The security strength of a field is equivalent to the security strength of the most unsafe system in this field.