-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update: threat_modeling_cheat_sheet #1430
Comments
Brainstorming is a useful threat-modeling technique and I use it a lot, but I don't see it as an alternative to DFDs, so I don't think it should be presented as such. DFD is a useful artifact that is easier to explain and dates way back in computer science / software engineering literature. And multiple people who understand DFDs generally will gather than same meaning from a specific DFD because it has some semi-formal rules associated with it's presentation. Thus once the threat model is created, DFDs can serve as a communication mechanism. However, brainstorming is more of a discovery aid. It's a valuable one at that, but I'm not sure there is a standard nomenclature to represent a brainstorming session, which is why I don't see it as an alternative to DFDs. I'd be okay with this if it wasn't portrayed as an alternative to DFDs though, but instead as an additional useful technique. |
I agree with @kwwall here. I would like to have a 'brainstorming' section somewhere in the document but this does not fit for e as an alternative to DFD. In "System Modeling" I see that sometimes we do not have a DFD and we do the brainstorming to create DFD. Also sometimes DFD is not the best choice (the system is too complex, creating DFD will take too much time, people in the room are not familiar with it, etc.). In such situation we want to do brainstorming to discover the space that we want to threat model, and as @sebob mention unification of knowledge and terminology, a shared understanding of the domain. But the outcome of this brainstorming is System Model - it can be in form of DFD in can be an ugly drawing on the whiteboard, it can be something else. My point is brainstorming is part of the system modeling regardless if the outcome (so the system model) is in the form of DFD of something else (even notes would be fine but not easy to use in my opinion). If we can democratise this part and let our users know that DFDs are good but you do not need to have a perfect DFD to do the threat modeling and almost any model that you will create will work - I am for such changes. |
If both @kwwall and @mackowski agree then I absolutely think we need this in the doc. Let's do it. |
Great, I'm very happy to hear that. Do you have any suggestions for changes or improvements that I should make? If not, let's proceed because I have a few more things I want to address. From my experience, it's clear that people need more information about threat modeling because they often get lost. This cannot be a taboo subject; we need to work on spreading knowledge on this topic. Please let me know what our next steps are – thanks! |
@sebob please create a PR for us to review. If you will need any help let us know. |
With reference to the discussion OWASP#1430
What is missing or needs to be updated?
There is no alternative to the "System Modeling" section
How should this be resolved?
Text to add as a subsection for "System Modeling", just below this section.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: