-
Website
http://www.matasano.com/log -
Original page
http://www.matasano.com/log/1026/seven-deadly-pen-test-sins/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Press Controls
3 comments · 2 points
-
ChrisMtso
12 comments · 1 points
-
Eric Monti
11 comments · 1 points
-
StatlerAndWaldorf
12 comments · 3 points
-
Dave G.
7 comments · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
- Get it in writing. If you don't have a written agreement to do the testing, signed by someone with the authority to grant permission, then don't start. (Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.)
- Scope and Target. You brushed this topic in 1, 2, and 7. Basically, you need to know what to look at and what to look for. It's great to identify that they are using an F5 load balancer and showing that there is an inherent vulnerability in them. But unless the customer is F5, there is no point in doing a deep pen-test of the load balancer.
- No plan. A good pen-test should end with a map of the system, dependencies, etc. If you're testing a network, then there should be a detailed map of the network discovered by the pen-tester. If you're testing an application then you should have a design architecture as seen by the pen-tester. Without this, the customer will know that the tester was just bouncing around from random exploit to random exploit.
Great post, though I think because I try not to be guilty of #5 I become guilty of #1.
For me, hacking is a creative process rather than a 9 to 5 day job.
in term of QA is the pure hacking (more chaos related ;)) the wrong approach. a good pentester should work with prepared checklist (testcase description., passed/failed criteria) and a well defined method and more structured (reusability and repeatability ). no one says that a pentester with a QA background cant hack with creativity...
to point number 7: a pentest should understand and explain the BUSINESS IMPACT of a vuln.
;)