Artificial Intelligence Review

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 259–276 | Cite as

Systematic review of web application security development model

  • Bala Musa Shuaibu
  • Norita Md Norwawi
  • Mohd Hasan Selamat
  • Abdulkareem Al-Alwani
Article

Abstract

In recent years, web security has been viewed in the context of securing the web application layer from attacks by unauthorized users. The vulnerabilities existing in the web application layer have been attributed either to using an inappropriate software development model to guide the development process, or the use of a software development model that does not consider security as a key factor. Therefore, this systematic literature review is conducted to investigate the various security development models used to secure the web application layer, the security approaches or techniques used in the process, the stages in the development model in which the approaches or techniques are emphasized, and the tools and mechanism used to detect vulnerabilities. The study extracted 499 publications from respectable scientific sources, i.e. the IEEE Computer Society, ACM Digital Library, Google-Scholar, Science Direct, Scopus, Springer Link and ISI Web. After investigation, only 43 key primary studies were considered for this review based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. From the review, it appears that no one development model is referred to as a standard or preferred model for web application development. However, agile development models seem to have gained more attention, probably due to the multiple stakeholders that are involved in discussing security viewpoints, rather than a few members of the development team. It appears also that there is consistency in the use of the threat-modeling technique, probably due to its effectiveness in dealing with different kinds of vulnerabilities.

Keywords

Development lifecycle Web engineering Application layer Security Systematic review 

References

  1. Alalfi MH, Cordy JR, Dean TR (2009) A verification framework for access control in dynamic web applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd Canadian conference on computer science and software engineering, Montreal, Quebec, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  2. Aydal EG, Paige RF, Chivers H, Brooke PJ (2006) Security planning and refactoring in extreme programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4044Google Scholar
  3. Bala MS, Norita MN (2011) Secure E-commerce web development framework. Inf Technol J 10(4):769–779Google Scholar
  4. Balzarotti D, Cova M, Felmetsger VV, Vigna G (2007) Multi-module vulnerability analysis of web-based applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th ACM conference on computer and communications security, Alexandria, Virginia, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanco C, Lasheras J, Valencia-Garcia R, Fernandez-Medina E, Toval A, Piattini MA (2008) Systematic review and comparison of security ontologies. In: Availability, reliability and security, 2008. ARES 08. Third international conference on, 4–7 March 2008, pp 813–820. doi:10.1109/ares.2008.33
  6. Cachia E, Micallef M (2007) A Multi-Tier, multi-role security framework for E-commerce systems. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th annual IEEE international conference and workshops on the engineering of computer-based systemsGoogle Scholar
  7. Choi KC, Lee GH (2006) Automatic test approach of web application for security (AutoInspect). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3983:659–668Google Scholar
  8. Chong S, Liu J, Myers AC, Qi X, Vikram K, Zheng L, Zheng X, (2009) Building secure web applications with automatic partitioning. Commun ACM 52(2):79–87. doi:10.1145/1461928.1461949 Google Scholar
  9. Dadeau F, Potet ML, Tissot R (2008) AB formal framework for security developments in the domain of smart card applications. In: Proceedings of the Ifip Tc 11 23rd international information security conference on, 7–10 Sept 2008, Springer, pp 141–155, Milano, Italy. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09699-5_10
  10. Dimitrakos T, Raptis D, Ritchie B, Stølen K (2002) Model-based security risk analysis for web applications: the CORAS approach. In: Proceedings of the EuroWeb 2002, (Electronic Workshops in Computing). British Computer Society, St Anne’s College, Oxford, UK. Available on-line at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.195.6095&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  11. Dong J, Peng T, Zhao Y (2010) Automated verification of security pattern compositions. Inf Softw Technol 52(3):274–295Google Scholar
  12. Dyba T, Dingsoyr T (2008) Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Inf Softw Technol 50(9–10):833–859Google Scholar
  13. Fernandez EB (2007) Security patterns and secure systems design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 45th annual southeast regional conference, Winston-Salem, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  14. Futcher L, Solms R (2007) SecSDM: a model for integrating security into the software development life cycle. In: IFIP international federation for information processing, Boston, pp 41–48Google Scholar
  15. Ge X, Paige RF, Polack FAC, Chivers H, Brooke PJ (2006) Agile development of secure web applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th international conference on web engineering, Palo Alto, California, USA, pp 305–312. doi:10.1145/1145581.1145641
  16. Gürgens S, Ochsenschläger P, Rudolph C (2005) On a formal framework for security properties. Comput Stand Interfaces 27(5):457–466Google Scholar
  17. Halfond WGJ, Orso A (2005) AMNESIA: analysis and monitoring for NEutralizing SQL-injection attacks. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 20th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, Long Beach, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  18. Hassan R, Bohner S, El-Kassas S, Eltoweissy M (2008) Goal-oriented, B-based formal derivation of security design specifications from security requirements. In: Availability, reliability and security, 2008. ARES 2008. Third international conference on, 4–7 March 2008, pp 1443–1450. doi:10.1109/ares.2008.77
  19. Hermosillo G, Gomez R, Seinturier L, Duchien L (2007) AProSec: an aspect for programming secure web applications. In: Conference the second international on availability, reliability and security, Vienna, pp 1026–1033Google Scholar
  20. Huang YW, Huang SK, Lin TP, Tsai CH (2003) Web application security assessment by fault injection and behavior monitoring. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  21. Huang YW, Yu F, Hang C, Tsai CH, Lee DT, Kuo SY (2004) Securing web application code by static analysis and runtime protection. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Huang Y, Geng X, Whinston AB (2007) Defeating DDoS attacks by fixing the incentive chain. ACM Trans Internet Technol 7(1):5. doi:10.1145/1189740.1189745 Google Scholar
  23. Jones R, Rastogi A (2004) Secure coding: building security into the software development, life cycle 29-39Google Scholar
  24. Kals S, Kirda E, Kruegel C, Jovanovic N (2006) SecuBat: a web vulnerability scanner. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web, Edinburgh, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  25. Keramati H, Mirian-Hosseinabadi S-H (2008) Integrating software development security activities with agile methodologies. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/ACS international conference on computer systems and applicationsGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim YG, Cha S (2012) Threat scenario-based security risk analysis using use case modeling in information systems. Secur Commun Netw 5(3):293–300. doi:10.1002/sec.321
  27. Kitchenham B (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering, Version 2.3, EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01, Keele University and University of DurhamGoogle Scholar
  28. Lam MS, Martin M, Livshits B, Whaley J (2008) Securing web applications with static and dynamic information flow tracking. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGPLAN symposium on partial evaluation and semantics-based program manipulation, San Francisco, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  29. Lipner S (2004) The trustworthy computing security development lifecycle. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 20th annual computer security applications conferenceGoogle Scholar
  30. Livshits B, Erlingsson l (2007) Using web application construction frameworks to protect against code injection attacks. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2007 workshop on programming languages and analysis for security, San Diego, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  31. Lucas FJ, Molina F, Toval A (2009) A systematic review of UML model consistency management. Inf Softw Technol 51(12):1631–1645Google Scholar
  32. Mao L (2006) Research of electronic commerce systems modeling method on RUP. Dyn Continuous Discret Impuls Syst Ser B Appl Algorithms 13:731–734Google Scholar
  33. Mellado D, Blanco C, Sánchez LE, Fernández-Medina E (2010a) A systematic review of security requirements engineering. Comput Stand Interfaces 32(4):153–165Google Scholar
  34. Mellado D, Fernandez ME, Piattini M (2010b) Security requirements engineering framework for software product lines. Inf Softw Technol 52(10):1094–1117Google Scholar
  35. Moebius N, Haneberg D, Reif W, Schellhorn G(2007) A modeling framework for the development of provably secure E-commerce applications. In: Software engineering advances, 2007. ICSEA 2007. International conference on, 25–31 August 2007, pp 8–8Google Scholar
  36. Moffett JD, Nuseibeh BA, (2006) A framework for security requirements engineering. Softw Engineering for secure systems workshop with the 28th Int”l conference software engineering, Shanghai, China, pp 35–41Google Scholar
  37. Moja LP, Telaro E, D’Amico R, Moschetti I, Coe L, Liberati A (2005) Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study. BMJ 330(7499):1053. doi:10.1136/bmj.38414.515938.8F Google Scholar
  38. Mourad A, Laverdière M, Debbabi M (2008) An aspect-oriented approach for the systematic security hardening of code. Comput Secur 27(3–4):101–114Google Scholar
  39. Mouratidis H, Jürjens J, Fox J (2006) Towards a comprehensive framework for secure systems development. Paper presented at the 18th International conference on advanced information systems engineering, CAiSE 2006, Luxembourg, 5–9 June, 2006Google Scholar
  40. Okubo T, Tanaka H (2007) Secure software development through coding conventions and frameworks. In: Availability, reliability and security, 2007. ARES 2007. The second international conference on, 10–13 April 2007, pp 1042–1051Google Scholar
  41. Olsen BMJ, O, Middleton P, Ezzo J, Gotzsche PC, Hadhazy V, Herxheimer A, Kleijnen J, McIntosh H (2001) Quality of cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998. BMJ 323(7317):829–832. doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7317.829
  42. Oxman AD (1994) Systematic reviews: checklists for review articles. BMJ 309(6955):648–651Google Scholar
  43. Popp G, Jurjens J, Wimmel G, Breu R (2003)Security-critical system development with extended use cases. In: Software engineering conference, 2003. Tenth Asia-Pacific, 10–12 Dec 2003, pp 478–487Google Scholar
  44. Schumacher M, Ackermann R, Steinmetz R (2000) Towards security at all stages of a system’s life cycle. In: Proceedings of international conference on software, telecommunications, and computer networks (Softcom), 2000Google Scholar
  45. Scott D, Sharp R (2002) Developing secure Web applications. Internet Comput IEEE 6(6):38–45Google Scholar
  46. Seo SC, You JH, Kim YD, Choi JY, Lee SJ, Kim BK, (2005) Building security requirements using state transition diagram at security threat location. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3802:451–456Google Scholar
  47. Sharma S, Sugumaran V, Rajakopalan B (2002) Framework for creating hybrid-open source software communittees. Inf Syst J 12(1):7–25Google Scholar
  48. Stuttard D, Pinto M (2008) The web application hacker’s handbook: discovering and exploiting security flaws. Wiley, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  49. Sulayman M (2009) A systematic literature review of software process improvement for small and medium Web companies. The University of Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  50. Sulayman M, Mendes E (2009) A systematic literature review of software process improvement in small and medium web companies. In: Advances in software engineering, vol 59. Communications in computer and information science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1–8. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-10619-4_1
  51. Tappenden A, Beatty P, Miller J, Geras A, Smith M, IEEE Computer SOC (2005) Agile security testing of Web-based systems via HTTPUnit. AGILE 2005, ProceedingsGoogle Scholar
  52. Vidakovic D, Simic D (2007) A novel approach to building secure systems. In: Availability, reliability and security, 2007. ARES 2007. The second international conference on, 10–13 April 2007, pp 1074–1084Google Scholar
  53. Viega J, McGraw G (2001) Building secure software. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  54. Viega J, McGraw G (2002) Token-based scanning of source code for security problems. ACM Trans Inf Syst Secur 5(3):238–261. doi:10.1145/545186.545188 Google Scholar
  55. Ware MS, Bowles JB, (2006) Eastman CM using the common criteria to elicit security requirements with use cases. In: SoutheastCon, 2006. Proceedings of the IEEE, March 31 2005–April 2 2005, pp 273–278Google Scholar
  56. Xiong P, Peyton L (2010) A model-driven penetration test framework for Web applications. In: 2010 Eighth annual international conference on privacy security and trust (PST), Ottawa, 17–19 Aug. 2010, pp 173–180Google Scholar
  57. Zhang X, Wang G, Fan L (2007) Web-based coordination for E-commerce. In: IFIP advances in information and communication technology, Boston, 2007. IFIP advances in information and communication technology. Springer, Boston, pp 515-522. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09699-5_10

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bala Musa Shuaibu
    • 1
  • Norita Md Norwawi
    • 2
  • Mohd Hasan Selamat
    • 3
  • Abdulkareem Al-Alwani
    • 1
  1. 1.Yanbu University CollegeYanbu Industrial CityKingdom of Saudi Arabia
  2. 2.Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversiti Sains Islam MalaysiaNegeri SembilanMalaysia
  3. 3.Faculty of Computer Science and InformationUniversiti Putra MalaysiaSerdang, SelangorMalaysia

Personalised recommendations