Can't add threats to diagram

[sbmilburn]

In the attached screen shot I created a simple diagram and added to threats "My Threat 1" and "My Threat 2" but can't seem to figure out how to add them onto the diagram so does that functionality not exist yet?

[Glavin001]

Could you elaborate on what you mean?

So far I see our current expected usage: threats have been added to the diagram.

Are you wanting to connect Threats to Elements and Flows?

[Glavin001]

@Frozenfire92 you built the Threat section. Maybe you would be better suited to tackle this one?

[sbmilburn]

Where do I see them added because I do not see them on the diagram unless I'm missing something? but in the screenshot I show I don't see how you link the threats on the left to the diagram on the right part of the page. Yeah it would be nice to link the threats to specific points or flows of the diagram. This way I can link SQL related threats to the database flows and web threats to the web flows,etc.

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 1, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Glavin Wiechert notifications@github.com wrote:

Could you elaborate on what you mean?

So far I see our current expected usage: threats have been added to the diagram.

Are you wanting to connect Threats to Elements and Flows?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Glavin001]

Where do I see them added because I do not see them on the diagram unless I'm missing something? but in the screenshot I show I don't see how you link the threats on the left to the diagram on the right part of the page.

My apologies: when I said that the treats have been added to the diagram, I mean from a model / in-memory perspective. However, as you correctly pointed out, they are not rendered visually, yet.

Yeah it would be nice to link the threats to specific points or flows of the diagram.

Do you think Threats would be something that should be attached directly to an Element or Flow? For instance, any of those items under "Properties". Should these Threats be more so Element/Flow specific, and the Diagram's Threats are really just an aggregation of all of it's child elements's/flow's threats?

This way I can link SQL related threats to the database flows and web threats to the web flows,etc.

This makes a lot of sense. Would the implement I describe above suffice?

[sbmilburn]

I think attaching it to the element via the properties would be a good idea because you could have multiple threats or even a group of threats for a given flow. Implementing what you describe should suffice.

Cheers
Shane

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 1, 2015, at 6:23 PM, Glavin Wiechert notifications@github.com wrote:

Where do I see them added because I do not see them on the diagram unless I'm missing something? but in the screenshot I show I don't see how you link the threats on the left to the diagram on the right part of the page.

My apologies: when I said that the treats have been added to the diagram, I mean from a model / in-memory perspective. However, as you correctly pointed out, they are not rendered visually, yet.

Yeah it would be nice to link the threats to specific points or flows of the diagram.

Do you think Threats would be something that should be attached directly to an Element or Flow? For instance, any of those items under "Properties". Should these Threats be more so Element/Flow specific, and the Diagram's Threats are really just an aggregation of all of it's child elements's/flow's threats?

This way I can link SQL related threats to the database flows and web threats to the web flows,etc.

This makes a lot of sense. Would the implement I describe above suffice?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Glavin001]

Do you see a case where a Diagram itself would have a threat -- what it is now? Threats on diagrams would not be attached to anything visual and so they would not be rendered in the drawing panel.
I am wondering if it would be OK to remove threats from the Diagram all together and add to Elements and Flows.

/cc @Frozenfire92 thoughts?

[Frozenfire92]

I'm wondering what is the best way to visually denote this. I think having threats be separate of the properties (the drop down tabs) makes sense from an ease of use perspective. However how do we properly link them to flow(s), element(s), and diagram(s)? As some threats may be model wide, where as some like @sbmilburn has mentioned are very specific to certain aspects. Would a second header (dropdown, etc.) in the threats be useful in saying things like Link to diagram Link to Flow etc.?

[Glavin001]

Joel could you give me an example for a model wide threat? I'm trying to picture some examples so I can think through these and what makes sense for UX. Thanks! 

—
Sent from Mailbox

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Joel Kuntz notifications@github.com
wrote:

I'm wondering what is the best way to visually denote this. I think having threats be separate of the properties (the drop down tabs) makes sense from an ease of use perspective. However how do we properly link them to flow(s), element(s), and diagram(s)? As some threats may be model wide, where as some like @sbmilburn has mentioned are very specific to certain aspects. Would a second header (dropdown, etc.) in the threats be useful in saying things like Link to diagram Link to Flow etc.?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#67 (comment)