Search Results

Search found 22139 results on 886 pages for 'security testing'.

Page 95/886 | < Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >

  • Take Advantage of Oracle's Ongoing Assurance Effort!

    - by eric.maurice
    Hi, this is Eric Maurice again! A few years ago, I posted a blog entry, which discussed the psychology of patching. The point of this blog entry was that a natural tendency existed for systems and database administrators to be reluctant to apply patches, even security patches, because of the fear of "breaking" the system. Unfortunately, this belief in the principle "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!" creates significant risks for organizations. Running systems without applying the proper security patches can greatly compromise the security posture of the organization because the security controls available in the affected system may be compromised as a result of the existence of the unfixed vulnerabilities. As a result, Oracle continues to strongly recommend that customers apply all security fixes as soon as possible. Most recently, I have had a number of conversations with customers who questioned the need to upgrade their highly stable but otherwise unsupported Oracle systems. These customers wanted to know more about the kind of security risks they were exposed to, by running obsolete versions of Oracle software. As per Oracle Support Policies, Critical Patch Updates are produced for currently supported products. In other words, Critical Patch Updates are not created by Oracle for product versions that are no longer covered under the Premier Support or Extended Support phases of the Lifetime Support Policy. One statement used in each Critical Patch Update Advisory is particularly important: "We recommend that customers upgrade to a supported version of Oracle products in order to obtain patches. Unsupported products, releases and versions are not tested for the presence of vulnerabilities addressed by this Critical Patch Update. However, it is likely that earlier versions of affected releases are also affected by these vulnerabilities." The purpose of this warning is to inform Oracle customers that a number of the vulnerabilities fixed in each Critical Patch Update may affect older versions of a specific product line. In other words, each Critical Patch Update provides a number of fixes for currently supported versions of a given product line (this information is listed for each bug in the Risk Matrices of the Critical Patch Update Advisory), but the unsupported versions in the same product line, while they may be affected by the vulnerabilities, will not receive the fixes, and are therefore vulnerable to attacks. The risk assumed by organizations wishing to remain on unsupported versions is amplified by the behavior of malicious hackers, who typically will attempt to, and sometimes succeed in, reverse-engineering the content of vendors' security fixes. As a result, it is not uncommon for exploits to be published soon after Oracle discloses vulnerabilities with the release of a Critical Patch Update or Security Alert. Let's consider now the nature of the vulnerabilities that may exist in obsolete versions of Oracle software. A number of severe vulnerabilities have been fixed by Oracle over the years. While Oracle does not test unsupported products, releases and versions for the presence of vulnerabilities addressed by each Critical Patch Update, it should be assumed that a number of the vulnerabilities fixed with the Critical Patch Update program do exist in unsupported versions (regardless of the product considered). The most severe vulnerabilities fixed in past Critical Patch Updates may result in full compromise of the targeted systems, down to the OS level, by remote and unauthenticated users (these vulnerabilities receive a CVSS Base Score of 10.0) or almost as critically, may result in the compromise of the affected systems (without compromising the underlying OS) by a remote and unauthenticated users (these vulnerabilities receive a CVSS Base Score of 7.5). Such vulnerabilities may result in complete takeover of the targeted machine (for the CVSS 10.0), or may result in allowing the attacker the ability to create a denial of service against the affected system or even hijacking or stealing all the data hosted by the compromised system (for the CVSS 7.5). The bottom line is that organizations should assume the worst case: that the most critical vulnerabilities are present in their unsupported version; therefore, it is Oracle's recommendation that all organizations move to supported systems and apply security patches in a timely fashion. Organizations that currently run supported versions but may be late in their security patch release level can quickly catch up because most Critical Patch Updates are cumulative. With a few exceptions noted in Oracle's Critical Patch Update Advisory, the application of the most recent Critical Patch Update will bring these products to current security patch level and provide the organization with the best possible security posture for their patch level. Furthermore, organizations are encouraged to upgrade to most recent versions as this will greatly improve their security posture. At Oracle, our security fixing policies state that security fixes are produced for the main code line first, and as a result, our products benefit from the mistakes made in previous version(s). Our ongoing assurance effort ensures that we work diligently to fix the vulnerabilities we find, and aim at constantly improving the security posture our products provide by default. Patch sets include numerous in-depth fixes in addition to those delivered through the Critical Patch Update and, in certain instances, important security fixes require major architectural changes that can only be included in new product releases (and cannot be backported through the Critical Patch Update program). For More Information: • Mary Ann Davidson is giving a webcast interview on Oracle Software Security Assurance on February 24th. The registration link for attending this webcast is located at http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=280304&s=1&k=6A7152F62313CA09F77EBCEEA9B6294F&partnerref=EricMblog • A blog entry discussing Oracle's practices for ensuring the quality of Critical patch Updates can be found at http://blogs.oracle.com/security/2009/07/ensuring_critical_patch_update_quality.html • The blog entry "To patch or not to patch" is located at http://blogs.oracle.com/security/2008/01/to_patch_or_not_to_patch.html • Oracle's Support Policies are located at http://www.oracle.com/us/support/policies/index.html • The Critical Patch Update & Security Alert page is located at http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alerts-086861.html

    Read the article

  • What are tangible advantages to proper Unit Tests over Functional Test called unit tests

    - by Jackie
    A project I am working on has a bunch of legacy tests that were not properly mocked out. Because of this the only dependency it has is EasyMock, which doesn't support statics, constructors with arguments, etc. The tests instead rely on database connections and such to "run" the tests. Adding powermock to handle these cases is being shot down as cost prohibitive due to the need to upgrade the existing project to support it (Another discussion). My questions are, what are the REAL world tangible benifits of proper unit testing I can use to push back? Are there any? Am I just being a stickler by saying that bad unit tests (even if they work) are bad? Is code coverage just as effective?

    Read the article

  • How do you make Bastille work and secure Ubuntu 12.04? It doesnt work for me `sudo bastille -x`

    - by BobMil
    I was able to install bastille from the normal repositories and then run the GUI. After going through the options and clicking OK to apply, it showed these errors. Do you know why Bastille wont work on Ubuntu 12.04? NOTE: Executing PSAD Specific Configuration NOTE: Executing File Permissions Specific Configuration NOTE: Executing Account Security Specific Configuration NOTE: Executing Boot Security Specific Configuration ERROR: Unable to open /etc/inittab as the swap file /etc/inittab.bastille already exists. Rename the swap file to allow Bastille to make desired file modifications. ERROR: open /etc/inittab.bastille failed... ERROR: open /etc/inittab failed. ERROR: Couldn't insert line to /etc/inittab, since open failed.NOTE: Executing Inetd Specific Configuration

    Read the article

  • rails fake data, considering switch from faker to forgery, any advantages or pitfalls?

    - by Michael Durrant
    With Ruby on Rails I've usually used Forgery for generating dummy data for testing. I've noticed recently that several clients and tutorials are using Faker They both seem fairly similar in use and popularity: Faker 128 forks, 418 watchers. Forgery 59 forks, 399 watchers. They both seem similar in how current they are: Faker Most updates are from 6 and 9 months ago. Forgery Most updates are from 4 and 9 months ago. The one distinguishing factor I've found so far is that Forgery seems like it has better instructions. Are there any particular benefits or disadvantages to using one over the other? Have you ever needed to switch from one to another for a particular reason?

    Read the article

  • Quality Assurance activities

    - by MasloIed
    Having asked but deleted the question as it was a bit misunderstood. If Quality Control is the actual testing, what are the commonest true quality assurance activities? I have read that verification (reviews, inspections..) but it does not make much sense to me as it looks more like quality control as mentioned here: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ENTERPRISE PERFORMANCE LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK Practices guide Verification - “Are we building the product right?” Verification is a quality control technique that is used to evaluate the system or its components to determine whether or not the project’s products satisfy defined requirements. During verification, the project’s processes are reviewed and examined by members of the IV&V team with the goal of preventing omissions, spotting problems, and ensuring the product is being developed correctly. Some Verification activities may include items such as: • Verification of requirement against defined specifications • Verification of design against defined specifications • Verification of product code against defined standards • Verification of terms, conditions, payment, etc., against contracts

    Read the article

  • Behavior-Driven Development / Use case diagram

    - by Mik378
    Regarding growing of Behavior-Driven Development imposing acceptance testing, are use cases diagram useful or do they lead to an "over-documentation"? Indeed, acceptance tests representing specifications by example, as use cases promote despite of a more generic manner (since cases, not scenarios), aren't they too similar to treat them both at the time of a newly created project? From this link, one opinion is: Another realization I had is that if you do UseCases and automated AcceptanceTests you are essentially doubling your work. There is duplication between the UseCases and the AcceptanceTests. I think there is a good case to be made that UserStories + AcceptanceTests are more efficient way to work when compared to UseCases + AcceptanceTests. What to think about?

    Read the article

  • What are the downsides of leaving automation tags in production code?

    - by joshin4colours
    I've been setting up debug tags for automated testing of a GWT-based web application. This involves turning on custom debug id tags/attributes for elements in the source of the app. It's a non-trivial task, particularly for larger, more complex web applications. Recently there's been some discussion of whether enabling such debug ids is a good idea to do across the board. Currently the debug ids are only turned on in development and testing servers, not in production. There have been points raised that enabling debug ids does cause performance to take a hit, and that debug ids in production may lead to security issues. What are benefits of doing this? Are there any significant risks for turning on debug tags in production code?

    Read the article

  • Registration free hosting for ASP.NET web service

    - by Andrew
    I've built a simple ASP.NET web service, tested it locally and would like to test it when externally hosted. Are there free hosting services available where I can just upload the assembly and service description file and test it straight away. Without registering the account, etc. My service does not do anything malicious and I am ok to run it in a restricted (security sandbox, bandwith, calls per second, etc) environment? I have heard about appharbor.com but it looks like an overkill to test a simple web service.

    Read the article

  • How to make Unit Tests to make sure stored procedure is deleting row from the database?

    - by aspdotnetuser
    I'm new to unit testing and I need some help with the following. I have created a small project to help me learn how to make Unit Tests. The functionality for one of the forms in my application deletes a user from the User table (and other rows in mapping tables). Currently, the unit test I have created to test this sets up the required objects and then calls the business rules method (passing in the user id) which calls the data access method to execute the stored procedure that deletes the rows in the tables. Is this the correct method to test whether something is being deleted successfully? Should the unit test / setup method first insert some test data which the unit test then deletes?

    Read the article

  • How to configure Google Analytics experiments manually

    - by John
    I wish to run multivariate tests on an e-commerce site that run across all product pages. I will be setting and deciding the variations myself all I need to do is track the results in GA. I think may be possible (although only A/B testing is available via the GA UI): https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/platform/features/experiments#serving-framework EXTERNAL – You will choose variations, handle experiment optimization, and only report the chosen variation to Google Analytics. For example, this should be used by 3rd-party optimization platforms that want to integrate with Google Analytics for reporting purposes. In this case, the Google Analytics statistical engine will not run. However how do I configure this and push the data to GA in my page?

    Read the article

  • How do you unit test your javascript.

    - by Erin
    I spend a lot of time working in javascript of late. I have not found a way that seems to work well for testing javascript. This in the past hasn't been a problem for me since most of the websites I worked on had very little javascript in them. I now have a new website that makes extensive use of jQuery I would like to build unit tests for most of the system. My problems are this. Most of the functions make changes to the DOM in some way. Most of the functions request data from the web server as well and require a session on the service to get results back. I would like to run the test from either a command line or a test running harness rather then in a browser. Any help or articles I should be reading would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • How can I test a parser for a bespoke XML schema?

    - by Greg B
    I'm parsing a bespoke XML format into an object graph using .NET 4.0. My parser is using the System.XML namespace internally, I'm then interrogating the relevant properties of XmlNodes to create my object graph. I've got a first cut of the parser working on a basic input file and I want to put some unit tests around this before I progress on to more complex input files. Is there a pattern for how to test a parser such as this? When I started looking at this, my first move was to new up and XmlDocument, XmlNamespaceManager and create an XmlElement. But it occurs to me that this is quite lengthy and prone to human error. My parser is quite recursive as you can imagine and this might lead to testing the full system rather than the individual units (methods) of the system. So a second question might be What refactoring might make a recursive parser more testable?

    Read the article

  • Examples and Best Practices for Seeding Defects?

    - by MathAttack
    Defect Seeding seems to be one of the few ways a development organization can tell how thorough an independent testing group is. I'm a fan of using metrics to help counter overconfidence biases, and drive discussions around facts. With that said, I haven't seen Seeding Defects used in practice. Are there best practices above and beyond what McConnell explained? Are there public examples where this has been done? In the absence of the above, any thoughts on why it hasn't been done more? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How do you unit test your javascript

    - by Erin
    I spend a lot of time working in javascript of late. I have not found a way that seems to work well for testing javascript. This in the past hasn't been a problem for me since most of the websites I worked on had very little javascript in them. I now have a new website that makes extensive use of jQuery I would like to build unit tests for most of the system. My problems are this. Most of the functions make changes to the DOM in some way. Most of the functions request data from the web server as well and require a session on the service to get results back. I would like to run the test from either a command line or a test running harness rather then in a browser. Any help or articles I should be reading would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Adding unit tests to a legacy, plain C project

    - by Groo
    The title says it all. My company is reusing a legacy firmware project for a microcontroller device, written completely in plain C. There are parts which are obviously wrong and need changing, and coming from a C#/TDD background I don't like the idea of randomly refactoring stuff with no tests to assure us that functionality remains unchanged. Also, I've seen that hard to find bugs were introduced in many occasions through slightest changes (which is something which I believe would be fixed if regression testing was used). A lot of care needs to be taken to avoid these mistakes: it's hard to track a bunch of globals around the code. To summarize: How do you add unit tests to existing tightly coupled code before refactoring? What tools do you recommend? (less important, but still nice to know) I am not directly involved in writing this code (my responsibility is an app which will interact with the device in various ways), but it would be bad if good programming principles were left behind if there was a chance they could be used.

    Read the article

  • How does one unit test an algorithm

    - by Asa Baylus
    I was recently working on a JS slideshow which rotates images using a weighted average algorithm. Thankfully, timgilbert has written a weighted list script which implements the exact algorithm I needed. However in his documentation he's noted under todos: "unit tests!". I'd like to know is how one goes about unit testing an algorithm. In the case of a weighted average how would you create a proof that the averages are accurate when there is the element of randomness? Code samples of similar would be very helpful to my understanding.

    Read the article

  • Is it costly to leave the Console and Script features enabled in Firebug?

    - by parisminton
    For some time now, I've run Firebug constantly enabled to do quick DOM inspections, leaving the Console and Script panels disabled. I'm just starting to use these two features so I don't have to keep using alerts for testing and debugging. I enable them while I use them and turn them back off when I'm done. I'd like to know if these particular features can slow things down such that they shouldn't be left on round-the-clock. Like do they slow down page loads, use inordinate chunks of memory or something? I don't see anything about it in the Firebug wiki.

    Read the article

  • migrating product and team from startup race to quality development

    - by thevikas
    This is year 3 and product is selling good enough. Now we need to enforce good software development practices. The goal is to monitor incoming bug reports and reduce them, allow never ending features and get ready for scaling 10x. The phrases "test-driven-development" and "continuous-integration" are not even understood by the team cause they were all in the first 2 year product race. Tech team size is 5. The question is how to sell/convince team and management about TDD/unit testing/coding standards/documentation - with economics. train the team to do more than just feature coding and start writing test units along - which looks like more work, means needs more time! how to plan for creating units for all backlog production code

    Read the article

  • What open source POSIX compliance test suites are available?

    - by Richard Pennington
    I'm working on a small open source project, ELLCC, that uses clang/LLVM as a cross compiler for various target processors. For the runtime environment, I'm using the NetBSD libraries and porting them to target Linux and standalone systems. I want to run a POSIX compliance test suite on the code. I've found the Open POSIX Test Suite, which looks like a good start, but it hasn't been updated since 2005. I've done some preliminary testing (with gcc and ecc under Linux), and it looks like it needs a few updates for modern compilers. My questions are: Does the Open POSIX Test Suite live on somewhere in a more up to date form? Are there other open source alternatives?

    Read the article

  • What is the career path for a software developer/ programmer? [closed]

    - by Lo Wai Lun
    I've been working as a programmer for a few months and I often study CCNA , CISSP for future. Besides simple coding I was working on specs, designing applications, and all those around-like things. My question is, I want to be a information / system security specialist. what's the career path I should be aiming for? Is it like working on code for the rest of my life? :) Restart my career from the network engineer ? Or do programmers make a good manager-position people ? I know it's very subjective. Thing is, lately I find myself much more into the designing/working on specs part of the development project then the coding itself. How do you see it? Would you like to go from development to information security? Would you like to work on a project with a manager that used to be a coder?

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207: SQA as a supporting process?

    - by user970696
    I have been following ISO12207 for the sake of my thesis dealing with software quality. Now I should explain quality assurance and here comes the problem: according to this norm, QA is a supporting process, separated but on the same level with verification, validation and auditing processes. According to other sources, Quality Assurance is basically high level activity making sure that standards, norms etc. are being followed. Usually the part of Quality Assurance is the Quality Control (testing, reviewing, inspections also V&V) which measures the quality and provides QA with this information so it can be acted upon. I somehow do not understand how QA is thought to be according to this ISO and what activities should it perform. Also it does not mention QC except for a footnote.

    Read the article

  • test coverage reality

    - by iPhoneDeveloper
    I am NOT doing test driven development and I write my test classes after the actual code is written. In my current project I have a test coverage of(Line coverage) %70 for 3000 lines of Java code.(Using JUnit, Mockito and Sonar for testing) But while I feel actually I am not covering and catching %70 of the problems that can occur. So my question is in theory is that possible to have a %100 Line coverage but in reality it is meaningless because of low quality of the test code and maybe a %40 well written test code is much better than a bad %100 coverage? or we can always say line coverage more or less gives the percentage of all covered issues?

    Read the article

  • What is the best unit test framework for .NET and why?

    - by rmx
    It seems to me that everyone uses NUnit without even considering the other options. I think this is because: Everyone is familiar with it already so they won't have to learn a new API. It is already set up with their continuous integration server to work with NUnit. Am I wrong about this? I decided to use xUnit on one of my own projects recently and I love it! It makes so much more sense to me and conceptually it seems like a definite step forward from NUnit. I'd like to hear opinions on which framework is actually the best - not taking into consideration having to learn it or reconfigure your automated testing.

    Read the article

  • Are my other partitions safe from harm from an alpha/beta release?

    - by Marcappuccino
    I am quite intrested in testing the latest alpha-3 of Ubuntu, however, performance in VirtualBox is slow and somewhat buggy (I know! It's an Alpha) - guest additions wern't installing, bad mouse intergration, etc. I would now like to test this release on my hard drive. But my main system (12.04) is also on this very same hard drive. Is this safe? Can the alpha touch my main partition? Are there any other risks?

    Read the article

  • Must all new features go through betatest?

    - by LTR
    Obviously, small usability fixes and bugfixes go directly into the stable product. What about small new features? Can you afford to just release them after internal testing, or do they have to be betatested by customers first? Situation: This is a young commercial project, produced by a one-person company. It has an existing userbase and is at it's second major version. Previous betatests have produced some results, however most feedback came from the stable product and not from beta versions.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102  | Next Page >