This discussion is required. Each of you will choose an EoP card, and then create a post describing your card, why you chose it, and how the threat affects out application. Then, post your comments on at least 2 other students' posts.
Step 1 – Pick your EoP cardSelect any “card” from any “suit” from the EoP card deck
Step 2 – Online discussion – create a posting that describes your card, why you chose it, and how the threat affects our application.
Elevation of Privilege (EoP) Card Game:-
Elevation of Privilege (EoP) is the easy way to get started out hazard modeling, which is a core aspect of the diagram segment in the Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL). The EoP card recreation helps make clear the important points of risk modeling and examines possible threats to software program and pc systems (Fletcher, 1980).
The EoP recreation focuses on the following threats:
• Information Disclosure
• Denial of Service
• Elevation of Privilege
EoP makes use of a simple factor gadget that lets in you to venture other builders and emerge as your opponent's largest threat.
1) Spoofing:-Spoofing (S) is the first swimsuit of threats in the STRIDE risk enumeration.
Spoofing describes any danger that lets in an attacker to faux to be any person or something else. Accordingly, the characters on the cards are masked men and women carrying crowns - unknown attackers, pretending to be royalty.
2) Tampering (T):-Tampering is the 2nd go well with of threats in the STRIDE danger enumeration.
• Tampering describes any hazard that permits an attacker to alter or break records which the application has no longer allowed them to. Accordingly, the characters on the cards are green gremlins whose open mouths and sharp teeth may want to point out either shouting or a wish to eat.
•Tampering threats are typically countered thru quality implementations of Integrity safety and Authorisation.
• Successful way to mitigate tampering is to not care about the integrity of facts - this only works if you are in a position to deal with abusive and incorrect statistics without causing a loss of function ignoring integrity and hoping that attackers will no longer alter or break information is no longer a valid mitigation strategy.
3) Repudiation (R):- Repudiation (R) is the third go well with of threats in the STRIDE hazard enumeration.
•Repudiation describes any hazard that permits an attacker to deny that they have taken an action that your utility allowed. Repudiation is a complicated and perplexing threat, requiring that an motion which has happened can be denied by using the person who brought about it. Because it’s difficult and complex, the characters on the playing cards are capital letter “R”s with filled in loops. Bold faced lie-Rs, if you like.
•Repudiation threats are generally countered through excellent implementations of Logging, Integrity protection and Authorisation.
Mitigation method –
•Successful way to mitigate repudiation is to no longer care about that did what - this only works if you can accept that your application may additionally have interaction in multiple moves except your being able to decide who induced those actions, or whether or not they clearly occurred. Ignoring repudiation and hoping that attackers will voluntarily supply identifying data or proof of buy is no longer a legitimate mitigation strategy.
4) Information Disclosure:- Information Disclosure (I) is the fourth swimsuit of threats in the STRIDE chance enumeration.
•Information Disclosure describes any chance that permits an attacker to see information which the application now not enables them to. Accordingly, the characters on the cards are multi-coloured speech bubbles that indicate speech is going on – even when you don’t favour it to be.
•Information Disclosure threats are typically countered through satisfactory implementations of Authorisation and Cryptography.
Mitigation method –
•Another successful way to mitigate Information Disclosure is to not care about disclosing data - this only works if all your facts is public (this Wiki is an example of what occurs in this model!). Ignoring statistics secrecy and hoping that attackers will no longer strive to get right of entry to or study secret facts is now not a legitimate mitigation strategy.
5) Denial of Service:-Denial of Service (D) is the fifth suit of threats in the STRIDE threat enumeration.
•Denial of Service describes any chance that allows an attacker to prevent, or reduce, respectable get entry to offerings or statistics which the software needs to be providing. Accordingly, the characters on the cards are inexperienced brown and yellow attacker faces whose open mouths indicate that they are shouting loudly to drown every person else out.
•Denial of Service threats is usually countered via nice implementations of Throttling and Authentication.
Mitigation technique –
• Another profitable way to mitigate Denial of Service is to now not care about the availability of facts or service - this solely works if you are cozy with attackers or occasions causing a loss of function. Ignoring availability and hoping that attackers will convey your provider to a grinding halt is not a valid mitigation strategy.
6) Elevation of Privilege: - Elevation of Privilege (E) is the sixth go well with of threats in the STRIDE threat enumeration.
•Elevation of Privilege describes any threat that lets in an attacker to have get admission to records or performance which the utility need to now not enable them to. Accordingly, the characters on the cards are ponies, hearts and crowns, all approaches by using which you can persuade anyone that you’re extra essential than they have to certainly think you are.
•Elevation of Privilege threats are usually countered via excellent implementations of Authentication and Authorisation.
Mitigation method –
•Another successful way to mitigate Elevation of Privilege is to no longer care about access manages - this solely works if you are in a position to enable attackers to absolutely manage your application. Ignoring gets right of entry to manage and hoping that attackers will now not use increased rights than they deserve is not a legitimate mitigation strategy (Paddon, 2015).