RE: Respuesta: Penetration Testing Methodologies
From: rzaluski (rzaluski_at_ivolution.ca)
Date: 12/15/04
- Previous message: Chuck Fullerton: "RE: Volunteer pen testing"
- In reply to: Omar Herrera: "Respuesta: Penetration Testing Methodologies"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: "'Omar Herrera'" <oherrera@prodigy.net.mx>, "'Adriel T. Desautels'" <atd@secnetops.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:29:18 -0500
A Penetration Test entirely depends on the scope and depth of the operation
and what has been agreed upon. Sometimes finding a vulnerable system is
enough. It all depends on the level of intrusion of the Penetration Test.
My point is if you are Pen Testing a client's mission critical production
systems do you really want to bring it / them down? It is entirely possible
to do so costing a company potentially large amounts of money in the
process. This is especially if the testing is taking place with anything
that processes monetary transactions.
Richard Zaluski,
CISO, Security and Infrastructure Services
iVolution Technologies Incorporated
905.309.1911
866.601.4678
905.524.8450 (Pager)
www.ivolution.ca
rzaluski@ivolution.ca
-----Original Message-----
From: Omar Herrera [mailto:oherrera@prodigy.net.mx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 4:56 PM
To: Adriel T. Desautels
Cc: pen-test@securityfocus.com
Subject: Respuesta: Penetration Testing Methodologies
Importance: Low
----- Mensaje original -----
De: "Adriel T. Desautels" <atd@secnetops.com>
>
> Greetings List,
> I am interested in collecting ideas as to what people feel an ideal
> penetration test is. What does the ideal methodology look like and
> what are the goals? I am asking you this because I have been running
> into interesting issues in certain markets. It would appear that some
> people view penetration tests as nothing more then basic network
> vulnerability audits while others view a penetration test for what it
> is, a test designed to compromise target systems as PoC of
> vulnerability.
In my opinion, PenTests must include tests designed to compromise target
systems manually. The added value of a PenTest is to have someone able to
find (and exploit) vulnerabilities in custom applications (something beyond
that of which most tools can do).
>
> How do people feel about the use of automated tools and the weights
> of their results? What about manual or custom testing? We have our
> own methodology that we use for testing our client networks, but I am
> always interested in learning what else might be done. I'd be happy
> to engage anyone in a conversation about this subject.
>
Most consultants use automated tools to give you a standardized set of
results that can be reproduced (with the same tools), but custom testing is
important. I believe that any average PenTest consultant should be capable
of determining common false positives and incorrect results with manual
testing, such as IIS running on a Unix server or vulnerabilities for Apache
web server for an IIS web server.
Tools make many mistakes, and the least you would expect is that the guy
running the software knows what he is doing (and actually shows it).
Regards,
Omar Herrera
- Previous message: Chuck Fullerton: "RE: Volunteer pen testing"
- In reply to: Omar Herrera: "Respuesta: Penetration Testing Methodologies"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
