Paper detail

Vulnerabilities Mapping based on OWASP-SANS: a Survey for Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

The delivery of a framework in place for secure application development is of real value for application development teams to integrate security into their development life cycle, especially when a mobile or web application moves past the scanning stage and focuses increasingly on the remediation or mitigation phase based on static application security testing (SAST). For the first time, to the author's knowledge, the industry-standard Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) top 10 vulnerabilities and CWE/SANS top 25 most dangerous software errors are synced up in a matrix with Checkmarx vulnerability queries, producing an application security framework that helps development teams review and address code vulnerabilities, minimise false positives discovered in static scans and penetration tests, targeting an increased accuracy of the findings. A case study is conducted for vulnerabilities scanning of a proof-of-concept mobile malware detection app. Mapping the OWASP/SANS with Checkmarx vulnerabilities queries, flaws and vulnerabilities are demonstrated to be mitigated with improved efficiency.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.