Analytics

9/19/2018
09:40 AM
50%
50%

8 Keys to a Successful Penetration Test

Pen tests are expensive, but there are key factors that can make them worth the investment.
Previous
1 of 9
Next

(Image: AntonKarlik)

(Image: AntonKarlik)

In 1880, Prussian Field Marshal and military theorist Helmuth von Moltke the Elder wrote what can be translated in English as, "No plan of operations reaches with any certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy's main force." He meant that all plans are great until they run into reality.

That statement resonates today in cybersecurity. Many security professionals vet their security plans with reality via a penetration test, aka pen test, where a red team of white-hat hackers does their best to defeat the defenses established by the blue team of security. It is frequently an eye-opening experience for the blue team and their managers.

While virtually every security plan for an organization of any size calls for pen testing, these exercises tend to be expensive and frequently disruptive. It pays to make them as effective as possible. So what's the difference between a costly pen test that puts a tick in a check box versus one that's a legitimate tool for improving security?

Putting in the work to properly prepare for a pen test can lead to solid security benefits for the organization. More than half of the steps to a solid pen test occur prior to when the testing begins. That's not terribly unusual - aphorisms about practice, planning, and perfection are common - but it reinforces the idea that pen testing is not the sort of activity that can be taken lightly. And if it's going to be most effective for the organization, it can't be taken as an activity just for the sake of making auditors, regulators, or insurers happy.

The following steps for a successful pen test were gathered from personal experience, conversations with professionals including Tod Beardsley, director of research with Rapid7, Yonathan Klijnsma threat researcher at RiskIQ, and Stephen Boyer, founder and CTO of Bitsight Technologies, as well as numerous discussions with researchers at Black Hat USA and DEF CON 2018.

Have you been part of a pen test that has been highly valuable - or not? What steps did you find critical to making the pen test matter? Let us know in the comments section below.



 

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio

Previous
1 of 9
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
How Cybercriminals Clean Their Dirty Money
Alexon Bell, Global Head of AML & Compliance, Quantexa,  1/22/2019
Facebook Shuts Hundreds of Russia-Linked Pages, Accounts for Disinformation
Sara Peters, Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  1/17/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security 2018
This Dark Reading Tech Digest explores the biggest news stories of 2018 that shaped the cybersecurity landscape.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Data breach fears and the need to comply with regulations such as GDPR are two major drivers increased spending on security products and technologies. But other factors are contributing to the trend as well. Find out more about how enterprises are attacking the cybersecurity problem by reading our report today.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-15720
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
In Apache Airflow 1.8.2 and earlier, an authenticated user can execute code remotely on the Airflow webserver by creating a special object.
CVE-2017-17835
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
In Apache Airflow 1.8.2 and earlier, a CSRF vulnerability allowed for a remote command injection on a default install of Airflow.
CVE-2017-17836
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
In Apache Airflow 1.8.2 and earlier, an experimental Airflow feature displayed authenticated cookies, as well as passwords to databases used by Airflow. An attacker who has limited access to airflow, weather it be via XSS or by leaving a machine unlocked can exfil all credentials from the system.
CVE-2018-15614
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
A vulnerability in the one-x Portal component of IP Office could allow an authenticated user to perform stored cross site scripting attacks via fields in the Conference Scheduler Service that could affect other application users. Affected versions of IP Office include 10.0 through 10.1 SP3 and 11.0 ...
CVE-2018-20245
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
The LDAP auth backend (airflow.contrib.auth.backends.ldap_auth) prior to Apache Airflow 1.10.1 was misconfigured and contained improper checking of exceptions which disabled server certificate checking.