journal article·2020Open access

A Framework for Systematic Classification of Assets for Security Testing

Sadeeq Jan, Omer Bin Tauqeer, Fazal Qudus Khan, George Tsaramirsis, Awais Ahmad, Iftikhar Ahmad, Imran Maqsood, Niamat Ullah

Computers, Materials & Continua· Volume 66· Issue 1

Abstract

Over the last decade, a significant increase has been observed in the use of web-based Information systems that process sensitive information, e.g., personal, financial, medical. With this increased use, the security of such systems became a crucial aspect to ensure safety, integrity and authenticity of the data. To achieve the objectives of data safety, security testing is performed. However, with growth and diversity of information systems, it is challenging to apply security testing for each and every system. Therefore, it is important to classify the assets based on their required level of security using an appropriate technique. In this paper, we propose an asset security classification technique to classify the System Under Test (SUT) based on various factors such as system exposure, data criticality and security requirements. We perform an extensive evaluation of our technique on a sample of 451 information systems. Further, we use security testing on a sample extracted from the resulting prioritized systems to investigate the presence of vulnerabilities. Our technique achieved promising results of successfully assigning security levels to various assets in the tested environments and also found several vulnerabilities in them.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Web Application Security Vulnerabilities · Information and Cyber Security · Cloud Data Security Solutions

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (33)

Show source-provided references
1. Software penetration testing10.1109/MSP.2005.23 ↗
2. Overview and open issues on penetration test
3. OWASP Foundation, “Open web application security project,” 2004. Available: https://owasp.org/.
4. D. Wichers and J. Williams, “OWASP top-10 2017,” OWASP Foundation, 2017. [Onine]. Available: https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/OWASP_Top_Ten_2017/.
5. Security testing: A survey10.1016/bs.adcom.2015.11.003 ↗
6. P. Herzog, “OSSTMM 3: The open source security testing methodology manual-contemporary secutiy testing and analysis,” ISECOM, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://www.isecom.org/OSSTMM.3.pdf.
7. Testing web applications
8. X. Li and Y. Xue, “A survey on web application security,” Nashville, TN USA: Vanderbilt University, Technical Report, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://www.isis.vanderbilt.edu/sites/default/files/main_0.pdf.
9. Pixy: A static analysis tool for detecting web application vulnerabilities
10. Securing a smart anti-counterfeit web application
11. Vulnerabilities and security of web applications
12. C. Osborne, “Heathrow airport fined £120,000 over USB data breach debacle | ZDNet,” 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.zdnet.com/article/heathrow-airport-fined-120000-over-usb-data-breach-debacle/.
13. Understanding cloud computing vulnerabilities10.1109/MSP.2010.115 ↗
14. Network attacks: Taxonomy, tools and systems10.1016/j.jnca.2013.08.001 ↗
15. SIEM-based framework for security controls automation10.1108/09685221211267639 ↗
16. Radanliev · Design Principles for Cyber Risk Impact Assessment from Internet of Things (IoT) · 2019
17. Modeling cyber-physical vulnerability of the smart grid with incomplete information10.1109/TSG.2012.2232318 ↗
18. Decision support approaches for cyber security investment10.1016/j.dss.2016.02.012 ↗
19. A. Talalaev, “5 reasons why website security is important,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.webarxsecurity.com/5-reasons-website-security-important-2018/.
20. Security testing of web applications: Issues and challenges10.5120/15334-3667 ↗
21. E-government: Benefits, risks and a proposal to assessment including cloud computing and critical infrastructure
22. Cyber security measurement in depth for e-learning systems
23. A risk-assessment model for cyber attacks on information systems10.4304/jcp.5.3.352-359 ↗
24. Cybercrime prevention in the Kingdom of Bahrain via IT security audit plans
25. Quirc: A quantitative impact and risk assessment framework for cloud security
26. S. Bennetts, R. Pereira and R. Mitchell, “OWASP zed attack proxy (ZAP),” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://owasp.org/www-project-zap/.
27. B. Kimminich, “OWASP juice shop,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://owasp.org/www-project-juice-shop/.
28. S. Kazerooni, D. Cuthbert, A. Van der Stock and K. Raja, “OWASP application security verification standard,” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.owasp.org/images/5/58/OWASP_ASVS_Version_2.pdf.
29. M. Meucci and A. Muller, “OWASP testing guide v4, OWASP foundation,” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.owasp.org/images/5/58/OWASP_ASVS_Version_2.pdf.
30. Clarke-Salt · SQL Injection Attacks and Defense · 2012
31. Root cause analysis of session management and broken authentication vulnerabilities
32. Andreu · Professional Pen Testing for Web Applications · 2006
33. KPCERC Cyber Emergency & Response Center, “KP ITBoard,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://kpcerc.com/.