The Pros and Cons of Automated Pentesting

Penetration testing (pentesting) is critical for identifying vulnerabilities and being up to standard with modern security standards such as SOC2, ISO 27001, and NIST, amongst others. Organizations that are tight on budget often face the choice between automated pentesting and manual testing. While automated solutions offer certain benefits, manual pentesting remains the superior option for security.

Pros of Automated Pentesting

1. Cost-Effective and Efficient Automated pentesting is more affordable compared to manual testing. It enables rapid scanning of systems, making them a practical choice for organizations with limited budgets.
2. Speed and Convenience These tools can quickly analyze large environments and identify common vulnerabilities.
3. Consistency and Reusability Automated testing platforms follow set algorithms and scripts, ensuring consistent results across multiple scans. They can be reused regularly to monitor changes and new vulnerabilities, providing ongoing security oversight.
4. Scalability Automated pentesting tools can handle extensive networks with numerous endpoints, making them suitable for large-scale environments that need frequent evaluations.

Cons of Automated Pentesting

1. Limited Scope and Depth Automated tools are adept at identifying common vulnerabilities but may miss complex issues that require deeper analysis. For example, vulnerabilities like Hidden APIs, Shadow IT, and Insecure Direct Object References (IDOR) often evade automated detection as it involves understanding complex business logic and access controls that only a human tester could find.
2. False Positives and Negatives Automated scans can produce false positives, leading to unnecessary investigations, or miss critical vulnerabilities, leaving potential security gaps.
3. Lack of Contextual Understanding These tools may not fully grasp the context or business logic of applications, which can impact their ability to assess vulnerabilities in real-world scenarios effectively. 
4. Minimal Adaptability Automated tools excel in repetitive tasks but may struggle with adapting to unique or complex testing scenarios. Manual pentesting offers greater flexibility and adaptability, such as chaining multiple vulnerabilities together for a greater impact. For example, a tester might exploit an authentication bypass to access an admin panel, which could then reveal a hidden form vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), with additional steps required to bypass a Web Application Firewall (WAF).

The Role of Manual Pentesting

Manual pentesting remains a vital part of any comprehensive security strategy. Skilled testers bring human expertise, intuition, and creativity to the assessment process, enabling them to uncover complex vulnerabilities that automated tools might miss. They can evaluate business logic, perform intricate attack simulations, and provide tailored recommendations based on a deep understanding of the system’s architecture.

K1C: Offering Comprehensive Solutions

At K1C, we understand the strengths of both automated and manual pentesting. Which is why we offer both solutions.

‍