W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > June 2007

ACTION 215: Revisit threat trees

From: Rachna Dhamija <rachna.public@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:54:36 -0700
Message-ID: <a175c0a10706041654y1c2524f3v1da909dde24c51b8@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
It would be helpful if people could look over the threat trees before or
during the next call:

I modified the tree to add some attacks that are in scope but were not
reflected.  One source of confusion was that the section previously labeled
"site-impersonation attacks" only listed techniques to lure users to the
wrong website (e.g., sending a link in email), rather than
site-impersonation attacks themselves (e.g. chrome spoofing).   Luring and
site-impersonation attacks are now in separate sections.  If you disagree
with anything here, please edit the wiki!

As we discussed at the F2F, we still need to:
- determine how to integrate threats with the use cases (Rachna and
Johnathan think that use cases and threats are independent and don't need to
be integrated. Tlr may disagree).
- add references to evidence of actual attacks and vulnerability databases
(as suggested by Stephen F and seconded by Rachna)
- add any missing attacks (so far, only Yngve has reviewed and added
- make the terminology more formal and distinguish vulnerabilities, risks,
threats and exploits (as suggested by PHB)
- decide what to do with out of scope attacks (include them or not)

I am closing out this action, though I expect that related actions will be
assigned during the next call.

Received on Monday, 4 June 2007 23:54:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:16 UTC