Slashdot Mirror
Number of Web Application Hacks Up
An anonymous reader writes "According to an article at Information Week, 'Web site hacks are on the rise and pose a greater threat than the broad-based network attacks...' Citing statistics from the Web Hacking Incidents Database, 'Web hacking attacks numbered 58 in 2005, up from 16 in 2004 and 9 in 2003. Another 20 attacks have been reported this year against sites including open-source repository Sourceforge.net and social network MySpace.com, putting 2006 on pace to be the worst year yet.'"
rather the focus should be on people writing web applications with security low on their priority list.
I agree, and I think that the reason there are people writing web applications and not thinking about security is that web apps are still thought of by businesses as "pretty things to attract customers" rather than, "part of our network"
Pretty things are low on the list of priorities for managers, so they hire some kid to make their website.
I can't say that I've *ever* seen PHP or Perl or ASP code that looked like someone put some thought into it. Even things like indentation. Most of the code I've seen it actually looks like the coder just hit return at random times. And if they aren't making an effort to make their code readable and maintainable, then they probably aren't making an effort to make it secure.
Oh well, this is just the way things are. I really believe that if it weren't for building codes business owners would hire people off the street to construct their office buildings. "they are just slapping bricks together, what's the big deal?? Why should I pay an archetect big bucks for this? I'll get a high-school kid who will give me an office building in a week for $20."
Even if only a small percentage of all web attacks are reported, if that percentage stays stable then a rise in the number reported implies a rise in the total number of attacks.
Let's assume for a second that 1% of all attacks are reported. That would mean that 16 out of 1600 were reported in 2004 and 58 out of 5800 were reported in 2005. Now, let's say that the percentage of reports increased by 1% point in 2005. So, 1% reported in 2004 and 2% reported in 2005. That would mean that 16 out of 1600 were reported in 2004 and 58 out of 2900 were reported in 2005. So, in this scenario what looked look a 362.5% increase in attacks is actually only a 181.25% increase in attacks. So, a small change in the reported percentage could make a huge difference in the apparent increase. These numbers are so ridiculously low to begin with, I wouldn't be surprised if less than 1% of web attacks are reported. I looked through the list and can think of some attacks I know of to some pretty big sites that weren't reported. Plus, some incidents are pretty generic and don't address a specific attack while others do address specific attacks. So, their definition of a "Web hacking attacks" seems to be quite fluid. Basically what I'm saying is that these numbers are absolutely meaningless.
Bradley Holt
How much you want to bet that 80% of them were PHPBB forums? Why the heck do we have to patch these things on a monthly basis?
My code was left in their code base when they closed their source years ago, but they didn't compensate me or even try to contact me about it. Very sorry for giving you my time and code, OSDN.