Code review general refactoring #96
Conversation
…nected to avoid confusion.
…terparts for uniformity.
- clarify and uniformise info texts
- homogenise attack step patterns
- homogenise attack step names
- replace British spelling with its American counterparts
- remove unhelpful info strings
- flag attack steps as entry points
See #91 for more details
…he ConnectionRule logic and be clearer Changed also the ClientAccess association to NetworkClientAccess to highlight the network aspect of the client
…ormity and clarity
… deny for uniformity.
…es modify which is the preferred way.
…vent all of the relevant attack steps.
src/main/mal/DataResources.mal
Outdated
| @@ -88,96 +45,116 @@ category DataResources { | |||
|
|
|||
| | extract | |||
| user info: "The attacker is able to extract the information. This means that they have a path available through which they can transfer the information back to a system they control." | |||
|
|
|||
| // The following 10 attack steps are used to implement data replication | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are there 10 attack steps after this line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There were before I removed 5 of them in a later commit. Funny catch. :)
| developer info: "Reverse reach is used to determine whether or not the attacker can be reached by the user." | ||
| -> clientApplications().attemptReverseReach, | ||
| developer info: "Reverse reach is used to determine whether or not the attacker can be reached by the user. Reverse reach propagates via outgoing or bidirectional communications." | ||
| -> senderApplications().attemptReverseReach, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking on the old code, we had clientApplications().attemptReverseReach here and we now have senderApplications().attemptReverseReach. But isn't receiverApplications the equivalent of clientApplications? If that is the case then I messed up and renamed them the wrong way around :O
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, I am ultra confused right now. Previously we had let clientApplications = (applications \/ outApplications) so that means that the Applications that are having an outbound ConnectionRule were the clients?
This became now: let senderApplications = (applications \/ outApplications)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, I think your changes are correct, reverse reach propagates towards sender applications, it goes the opposite direction as regular network connectivity.
… language, and actually use the inboundAllowedConnections variable.
… used for data replication.
This is the massive code review pull request. See #91 for a list of issues meant to be solved by the pulls request.