Re: Writing Secure code[update]

charles lindsay wrote:

>the ISO 9000 series, as I recall, had more to do with documenting a (repeatable) process, and in the best of all worlds, providing a feedback process for improving it. In many cases, it has merely provided proof that a bad process can be repeated, and well understood.
That may be true; I am not very familiar with ISO 9000.

>I had thought the Common Criteria were a standardized measure for evaluating secure systems, without much in the way of guidelines about how to build them.
That is not true. The Common Criteria evaluates the security of systems largely in terms of how they are built, and additionally with respect to what features they provide. For instance, it is a CC requirement that all source code be under revision control. This requirement in itself effectively makes it near impossible to certify a full Linux distribution, because the code base for the hundreds of packages are maintained independently.

>The Orange Book probably came closest, but seemed largely unworkable, judging by its breadth of application: I believe only one system was ever certified A1,
This is also not true. According to the NSA Evaluated Products List <http://www.radium.ncsc.mil/tpep/epl/epl-by-class.html>, two "network components" have been evaluated A1, while *zero* operating systems and applications have made A1.

> and the most commonly applied level, C2, is so ridiculously trivial that it was even awarded to Windows (albeit NT, not 95).
Yeah; C2 pretty much requires that you show up for the meeting, and bring a check :-)

> Personally, I have very little faith in proof of correctness (a baase requirement for A1), as most proofs tended to be larger than the code they were trying to prove.
I agree with that.

Do you need help?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related securityfocus.com Links bugtraq certification focus-bsd focus-ids focus-ih focus-linux focus-ms focus-sun focus-unix-other focus-virus forensics incidents libnet linux-secnews ms-secnews pen-test secpapers secprog sectools secureshell security-basics securityjobs sf-news vuln-dev webappsec Request more information about Pantek

All of which supports my point: early standardization is a disaster. The Orange Book tried to standardize a discipline that is still not well understood, resulting in a standard that is overly expensive and underly effective, and therefore largely irrelevant to the real world.

Crispin

-- 
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist, WireX                      
http://wirex.com/~crispin/
Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       
http://immunix.org
Available for purchase: 
http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
			    Just say ".Nyet"