| Literature DB >> 25674480 |
Maragathavalli Palanivel1, Kanmani Selvadurai1.
Abstract
Security testing is a process of determining risks present in the system states and protects them from vulnerabilities. But security testing does not provide due importance to threat modeling and risk analysis simultaneously that affects confidentiality and integrity of the system. Risk analysis includes identification, evaluation and assessment of risks. Threat modeling approach is identifying threats associated with the system. Risk-driven security testing uses risk analysis results in test case identification, selection and assessment to prioritize and optimize the testing process. Threat modeling approach, STRIDE is generally used to identify both technical and non-technical threats present in the system. Thus, a security testing mechanism based on risk analysis results using STRIDE approach has been proposed for identifying highly risk states. Risk metrics considered for testing includes risk impact, risk possibility and risk threshold. Risk threshold value is directly proportional to risk impact and risk possibility. Risk-driven security testing results in reduced test suite which in turn reduces test case selection time. Risk analysis optimizes the test case selection and execution process. For experimentation, the system models namely LMS, ATM, OBS, OSS and MTRS are considered. The performance of proposed system is analyzed using Test Suite Reduction Rate (TSRR) and FSM coverage. TSRR varies from 13.16 to 21.43% whereas FSM coverage is achieved up to 91.49%. The results show that the proposed method combining risk analysis with threat modeling identifies states with high risks to improve the testing efficiency.Entities:
Keywords: Risk analysis; Risk-driven; STRIDE; Security testing; System states; Test suite; Threat modeling
Year: 2014 PMID: 25674480 PMCID: PMC4320241 DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-754
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Figure 1Risk-Driven Security Testing (RST).
Figure 2Test-Driven Security Risk Analysis (TSR).
Study on risk-based security testing
| Sl. no. | Title | Year | Techniques | Metrics | Systems/models used |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Risk-driven Security Testing versus Test-driven Security Risk Analysis | Feb 15, 2012 | Risk-driven security testing and Test-driven security risk analysis | Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Accountability. | Industrial Case Study |
| 2 | Baseline for Compositional Test-Based Security Risk Assessment | Jan 31, 2013 | Table based risk assessment technique | Risk identification, Risk Analysis, Risk Evaluation and Risk Treatment | Common Vulnerability Scoring system |
| 3 | Baseline for Compositional Risk-Based | Jan 31, 2013 | Risk-based vulnerability testing | Severity, Testability, Uncertainty, reusability | Scalable network system |
| Security Testing | |||||
| 4 | Risk-based Statistical Testing: A Refinement based | May 2009 | Model-based statistical testing, Markov chain test models | Safety Integrity Level (SIL) | Critical systems like fire alarm, railway control system |
| Approach to the Reliability Analysis of Safety-Critical Systems | |||||
| 5 | Effort-dependent technologies for multi-domain risk-based security testing | Sept 27, 2010 | Light weight risk and security testing | Proof-of-Performance, Proof-of-Concept, Proof-of-Existence | Security Audit of Supplier services, Maintaining security in virtual organization |
Figure 3Overall system design.
Figure 4Workflow diagram for state representation module.
Figure 5Workflow diagram for threat modelling.
Applying STRIDE threat modeling
| Element | Spoofing | Tampering | Repudiation | Information disclosure | Denial of service | Elevation of privilege |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data Flow | X | X | X | |||
| Data Store | X | X | X | |||
| Process | X | X | X | X | X | X |
| Interactor | X | X |
X- Threats Covered.
Figure 6Workflow diagram for risk analysis.
Figure 7Workflow diagram for test case selection and execution.
Figure 8EFSM for Library Management System (LMS).
Figure 9EFSM for Automated Teller machine (ATM).
Figure 10EFSM for Online Banking System (OBS).
Figure 11EFSM for Online Shopping System (OSS).
Figure 12EFSM for Movie Ticket Reservation System (MTRS).
Figure 13Comparison of various test suite sizes for each system model.
Results of performance parameters
| S. no. | System models | No. of states | No. of transitions | Original test suite | Reduced test suite | Test Suite Reduction Rate (TSRR) in % | No. of transitions covered | FSM coverage in % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before risk analysis | After risk analysis | ||||||||
| 1 | LMS | 7 | 13 | 28 | 22 | 21.43 | 224 | 197 | 87.95 |
| 2 | ATM | 3 | 9 | 114 | 99 | 13.16 | 1011 | 925 | 91.49 |
| 3 | OBS | 6 | 18 | 209 | 175 | 16.27 | 1665 | 1468 | 88.17 |
| 4 | OSS | 8 | 14 | 156 | 126 | 19.23 | 1614 | 1386 | 85.87 |
| 5 | MTRS | 7 | 13 | 160 | 132 | 17.5 | 2152 | 1882 | 87.45 |
Figure 14Comparison of FSM coverage for system models.
Figure 15Comparison of risk values.