IJSTR

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us
0.2
2019CiteScore
 
10th percentile
Powered by  Scopus
Scopus coverage:
Nov 2018 to May 2020

CALL FOR PAPERS
AUTHORS
DOWNLOADS
CONTACT

IJSTR >> Volume 9 - Issue 12, December 2020 Edition



International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616



Comparative Analysis Of WCAG 2.0 And WCAG 2.1 Based On The Accessibility Evaluation Of Pakistan’s Educational And Government Websites

[Full Text]

 

AUTHOR(S)

Muhammad Asif, Dr. Muhammad Sohail Khan, Faisal Abrar

 

KEYWORDS

WCAG 2.0, WCAG 2.1, XXS, CSRF, LFI, CNNVD, HTML, SQL, Vulnerabilities, EDU, GOV, web content, accessibility guidelines.

 

ABSTRACT

Website vulnerabilities are a major cause of security breaches in critical websites i.e. Government & Educational websites. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) provides a way to assess the level of vulnerability of a website in terms of various accessibility issues left un-noticed by website designers and developers. WCAG 2.1 is the latest version of accessibility guidelines for website vulnerability assessment which was preceded by WCAG 2.0. This paper provides a comparative analysis of WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1 based on vulnerability assessment of Pakistan’s educational and government websites. The study also investigates how effective WCAG 2.1 is with respect to WCAG 2.0. A total of 118 Pakistani Educational and Government websites have been examined for vulnerabilities based on both versions of the guidelines. Data gathered from both assessments was then utilized for comparative analysis and also visualizes via graphs to clearly understand the effectiveness of WCAG 2.1. The overall results show that WCAG 2.1 is more critical in identifying various types of vulnerabilities in websites.

 

REFERENCES

[1] A.Torkaman Atashzar et al., "A survey on web application vulnerabilities and countermeasures,"6th International Conf. on Computer Sciences and Convergence Information Technology (ICCIT),Seogwipo, 2011, pp. 647-652.Acunetix Ltd, Web Vulnerability Scanner, 2007, http://www.acunetix.com/vulnerability- scanner/
[2] Akgul, Y., 2016. Web Site Accessibility, Quality and Vulnerability Assessment: a Survey of Government Web Sites in the Turkish Republic. “Journal of Information Systems Engineering & Management, 1(4), p.50”.
[3] A. Edmundson et al., “An empirical study on the e_ectiveness of security code review”. In Engineering Secure Software and Systems, 2013.
[4] B. Rexha et al., "Impact of secure programming on web application vulnerabilities," 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Graphics, Vision, and Information Security (CGVIS), Bhubaneswar, 2015, pp. 61-66.
[5] Banks reluctant to use 'white hat' hackers to spot security aws. NPR, 2014.
[6] Bug bounty highlights and updates. Facebook, 2014.
[7] Benavides, A.D., Nukpezah, J, Keyes, L.M AND Soujaa, I., 2020. Adoption of Multilingual State Emergency Management Websites: Responsiveness to the Risk Communication Needs of a Multilingual Society. International Journal of Public Administration, pp. 1-11.
[8] Bennett, L. V., & Manoharan, A. P. (2017). The use of social media policies by US municipalities. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(4),317–328. doi:10.1080/01900692.2015.1113182
[9] Csontos, B. and Heckl, I., 2020. Accessibility, usability, and security evaluation of Hungarian government websites. Universal Access in the Information Society, pp.1-18.
[10] D’agostino, M. J., Schwester, R., Carrizales, T., & Melitski, J. (2011). A study of e-government and e-governance: An empirical examination of municipal websites. Public Administration Quarterly, 35(1). 3-25. doi:10.1111/puar.2004.64.issue-1
[11] “Evaluation of Web Vulnerability Scanners”The 8th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications24-26September2015, Warsaw, Poland.
[12] El et al., 2017, July. Benchmarking vulnerability scanners: An experiment on SCADA devices and scientific instruments. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI) (pp. 83-88). IEEE.
[13] G.Deepa and P. S.Thilagam, "Securing web applications from injection and logic vulnerabilities: Approaches and challenges, " 2016 Information and Software Technology, 74, 160-180”.
[14] Hassan et al., 2016. An Investigation of Educational Web Applications in Bangladesh: A Case Study on Local File Disclosure Vulnerability. In 4th International Conf. on “Engineering & Technology, Computer, Basic & Applied Sciences” (ECBA-2016), Sydney.
[15] Lanyi, C.S., Czank, N., Sik, A.: Testing the accessibility of web sites. Int. J. Knowl. Web Intell. 2(1), 87 (2011).
[16] Merkovity, N.: Hungarian party websites and parliamentary elec tions. Cent. Eur. J. Commun. 4(7), 209–225 (2011)
[17] OWASP 2013 Top 10. www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2013-Top_10.
[18] P. V. Ami et al, "Top Five Dangerous Security Risks over Web Application" 2013 International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science, 2(1), 41-43.
[19] Parimala et al., "Efficient Web Vulnerability Detection Tool for Sleeping Giant-Cross Site Request Forgery." In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1000, no. 1, p. 012125. IOP Publishing, 2018.
[20] R. Johari and P. Sharma, "A Survey on Web Application Vulnerabilities (SQLIA, XSS) Exploitation and Security Engine for SQL Injection," 2012 International Conference on Communication Systems and Network Technologies, 2012, Rajkot, pp. 453-458. H.
[21] Suteva, Natasa, Dragan Anastasov, and Aleksandra Mileva. "One unwanted feature of many Web Vulnerability Scanners." (2015): 279-283. Updates on vulnerability handling process. www.wooyun.org/notice.php?action=view&id=28,2013.
[22] Szeróvay, K.: Usability of e-Government websites, evaluation of the Hungarian e-Government portal. In: COFOLA 2011, pp. 1596–1635 (2011)