Skip to content

Commit 8e4ee9c

Browse files
committed
current status
1 parent 9f47930 commit 8e4ee9c

File tree

5 files changed

+3329
-1690
lines changed

5 files changed

+3329
-1690
lines changed

src/assets/YAML/default/CultureAndOrganization/Process.yaml

+39-3
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -80,6 +80,42 @@ Culture and Organization:
8080
- 17.1.1
8181
iso27001-2022:
8282
- 5.29
83-
isImplemented: false
84-
evidence: ""
85-
comments: ""
83+
Determining the protection requirement:
84+
uuid: 123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000
85+
risk: |-
86+
Not defining the protection requirement of applications can lead to wrong prioritization, delayed remediation of
87+
critical security issues, increasing the risk of exploitation and potential damage to the organization.
88+
measure: |-
89+
Defining the SLA to respond to findings depending on protection requirement and the corresponding handling of vulnerabilities per severity for components like applications are aligned to SLAs.
90+
This is performed for the hole organization and doesn't need to be broken down (yet) on team/product/application.
91+
At least quarterly.
92+
description: |-
93+
The protection requirements for an application should consider:
94+
- Data criticality
95+
- Application accessibility (internal vs. external)
96+
- Regulatory compliance
97+
- Other relevant factors
98+
difficultyOfImplementation:
99+
knowledge: 2
100+
time: 2
101+
resources: 1
102+
usefulness: 3
103+
level: 2
104+
dependsOn: []
105+
implementation:
106+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/owasp-defectdojo
107+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/purify
108+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/business-friendly-vulnerability-metrics
109+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/defectdojo-client
110+
references:
111+
samm2:
112+
- I-DM-3-B
113+
iso27001-2022:
114+
- 5.25
115+
- 5.12
116+
- 5.13
117+
- 5.10
118+
tags:
119+
- vulnerability-mgmt
120+
- metrics
121+
- vmm-measurements

src/assets/YAML/default/InformationGathering/TestKPI.yaml

+37-30
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -33,24 +33,33 @@ Information Gathering:
3333
- vulnerability-mgmt
3434
- metrics
3535
- vmm-measurement
36-
Patching mean time to resolution via PR:
37-
uuid: 86d490b9-d798-4a5b-a011-ab9688014c46
36+
Number of vulnerabilities/severity/layer:
37+
uuid: 0ec92899-a5cb-4649-984b-2fb1d6c784ad
3838
risk: |-
39-
Without measuring Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) related to patching, it is challenging to identify delays in the patching process. Unaddressed vulnerabilities can be exploited by attackers, leading to potential security breaches and data loss.
39+
Failing to convey the number of vulnerabilities by severity and layer (app/infra) might undermine the effectiveness of product teams. This might lead to ignorance of findings.
4040
measure: |-
41-
Measurement and communication of patching Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) in alignment with Service Level Agreements (SLAs), conducted at least on a quarterly basis.
42-
This includes the measurement of the existence of a properly configured automated pull request (PR) tool (e.g., Dependabot or Renovate) in a repository.
43-
In addition, the measurement of the time from opening an automated PR to merging it.
41+
Measurement and communication of vulnerabilities per severity for components like applications and split it depending on the layer (e.g. app/infra). At least quarterly.
42+
description: |-
43+
Communication can be performed in a simple way, e.g. text based during the build process.
44+
This activity depends on at least one security testing implementation.
45+
Layers to consider (SCA):
46+
- Cloud provider (if insights are possible)
47+
- Runtimes, e.g. Kubernetes nodes
48+
- Base images and container images
49+
- Application
4450
45-
Average time to patch is visualized per component/project/team.
51+
Layers to consider SAST/DAST:
52+
- Cloud provider
53+
- Runtime, e.g. Kubernetes
54+
- Base images and container images
55+
- Application
4656
difficultyOfImplementation:
47-
knowledge: 1
48-
time: 1
57+
knowledge: 2
58+
time: 2
4959
resources: 2
5060
usefulness: 3
5161
level: 2
52-
dependsOn:
53-
- uuid:8ae0b92c-10e0-4602-ba22-7524d6aed488 #Automated PRs for patches
62+
dependsOn: []
5463
implementation: []
5564
references:
5665
samm2:
@@ -61,30 +70,28 @@ Information Gathering:
6170
- 5.13
6271
- 5.10
6372
tags:
64-
- patching
73+
- vulnerability-mgmt
6574
- metrics
66-
- vmm-measurements
67-
SLA per criticality: # is this the definition of SLAs or the measurement?
68-
uuid: 123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000
75+
- vmm-measurement
76+
Patching mean time to resolution via PR:
77+
uuid: 86d490b9-d798-4a5b-a011-ab9688014c46
6978
risk: |-
70-
Not communicating how many applications are adhering to SLAs based on the criticality of vulnerabilities can lead to delayed remediation of
71-
critical security issues, increasing the risk of exploitation and potential damage to the organization.
79+
Without measuring Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) related to patching, it is challenging to identify delays in the patching process. Unaddressed vulnerabilities can be exploited by attackers, leading to potential security breaches and data loss.
7280
measure: |-
73-
Measurement and communication of how many of the vulnerabilities handling per severity for components like applications are aligned to SLAs.
74-
This is performed for the hole organization and doesn't need to be broken down (yet) on team/product/application.
75-
At least quarterly.
81+
Measurement and communication of patching Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) in alignment with Service Level Agreements (SLAs), conducted at least on a quarterly basis.
82+
This includes the measurement of the existence of a properly configured automated pull request (PR) tool (e.g., Dependabot or Renovate) in a repository.
83+
In addition, the measurement of the time from opening an automated PR to merging it.
84+
85+
Average time to patch is visualized per component/project/team.
7686
difficultyOfImplementation:
77-
knowledge: 2
78-
time: 2
87+
knowledge: 1
88+
time: 1
7989
resources: 2
8090
usefulness: 3
81-
level: 3
82-
dependsOn: []
83-
implementation:
84-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/owasp-defectdojo
85-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/purify
86-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/business-friendly-vulnerability-metrics
87-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/defectdojo-client
91+
level: 2
92+
dependsOn:
93+
- uuid:8ae0b92c-10e0-4602-ba22-7524d6aed488 #Automated PRs for patches
94+
implementation: []
8895
references:
8996
samm2:
9097
- I-DM-3-B
@@ -94,7 +101,7 @@ Information Gathering:
94101
- 5.13
95102
- 5.10
96103
tags:
97-
- vulnerability-mgmt
104+
- patching
98105
- metrics
99106
- vmm-measurements
100107
Patching mean time to resolution via production:

src/assets/YAML/default/TestAndVerification/Consolidation.yaml

+39
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -379,3 +379,42 @@ Test and Verification:
379379
tags:
380380
- vulnerability-mgmt
381381
- vmm-measurements
382+
Treatment of defects per protection requirement:
383+
uuid: 123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000
384+
risk: |-
385+
Not defining the protection requirement of applications can lead to wrong prioritization, delayed remediation of
386+
critical security issues, increasing the risk of exploitation and potential damage to the organization.
387+
measure: |-
388+
Defining the protection requirement and the corresponding handling of vulnerabilities per severity for components like applications are aligned to SLAs.
389+
This is performed for the hole organization and doesn't need to be broken down (yet) on team/product/application.
390+
At least quarterly.
391+
description: |-
392+
The protection requirements for an application should consider:
393+
- Data criticality
394+
- Application accessibility (internal vs. external)
395+
- Regulatory compliance
396+
- Other relevant factors
397+
difficultyOfImplementation:
398+
knowledge: 2
399+
time: 2
400+
resources: 2
401+
usefulness: 3
402+
level: 3
403+
dependsOn: []
404+
implementation:
405+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/owasp-defectdojo
406+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/purify
407+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/business-friendly-vulnerability-metrics
408+
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/defectdojo-client
409+
references:
410+
samm2:
411+
- I-DM-3-B
412+
iso27001-2022:
413+
- 5.25
414+
- 5.12
415+
- 5.13
416+
- 5.10
417+
tags:
418+
- vulnerability-mgmt
419+
- metrics
420+
- vmm-measurements

src/assets/YAML/default/TestAndVerification/StaticDepthForInfrastructure.yaml

+2-30
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Test and Verification:
4949
isImplemented: false
5050
evidence: ""
5151
comments: ""
52-
Test for known vulnerabilities:
52+
Software Composition Analysis:
5353
uuid: 26e1c6d5-5632-4ec7-80d2-e564b98732ad
5454
risk:
5555
Known vulnerabilities in infrastructure components like container images
@@ -346,32 +346,4 @@ Test and Verification:
346346
- 8.29
347347
- 8.25
348348
isImplemented: false
349-
Software Composition Analysis:
350-
uuid: d918cd44-a972-43e9-a974-eff3f4a5dcfe
351-
risk: Infrastructure components might have vulnerabilities.
352-
measure:
353-
Tests for known vulnerabilities in server side components (e.g. backend/middleware) are performed.
354-
difficultyOfImplementation:
355-
knowledge: 3
356-
time: 5
357-
resources: 1
358-
usefulness: 2
359-
level: 4
360-
dependsOn:
361-
- Defined build process
362-
- uuid:d918cd44-a972-43e9-a974-eff3f4a5dcfe
363-
implementation:
364-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/owasp-dependency-che
365-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/dependencyTrack
366-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/retire-js
367-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/npm-audit
368-
- $ref: src/assets/YAML/default/implementations.yaml#/implementations/trivy
369-
references:
370-
samm2:
371-
- V-ST-2-A
372-
iso27001-2017:
373-
- 12.6.1
374-
iso27001-2022:
375-
- 8.8
376-
tags:
377-
- vmm-testing
349+

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)