One Article Review
| Source |  AlienVault Lab Blog |
|---|---|
| Identifiant | 7762474 |
| Date de publication | 2022-11-01 10:00:00 (vue: 2022-11-01 10:06:34) |
| Titre | Choosing a DAST solution: What to pay attention to? |
| Texte | The content of this post is solely the responsibility of the author. AT&T does not adopt or endorse any of the views, positions, or information provided by the author in this article. The majority of today's web applications contain dangerous vulnerabilities. To analyze their security, one cannot do without a dynamic scanner. DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) tools allow you to detect and evaluate security problems quickly. Let me tell you what to look for when choosing such a tool. According to various studies, 70% of vulnerabilities have to do with errors in the code. Using vulnerabilities in your web application code, hackers can distribute malware, launch cryptojacking attacks, employ phishing and redirect users to malicious sites, hack a phone remotely, or steal personal data using social engineering techniques. Yes, sure, it is impossible to create perfectly secure software, but it is quite possible to reduce the number of vulnerabilities and increase the level of product security. To do this, you can rely on DevSecOps - a process that links development and security and where software is checked and tested for vulnerabilities at every stage of its creation. The DevSecOps process is very voluminous; it may include numerous information security tools. In this article, I want to talk about DAST and how to choose the right scanner for dynamic application analysis. Together we will figure out what tool characteristics and parameters you need to pay attention to and what product types are currently available on the market. What is DAST, and how does it work? Dynamic application security testing is one of the secure development practices where an automated analysis of a deployed and functioning application is carried out. The dynamic scanner checks all access points via HTTP, simulates external attacks using common vulnerabilities, and simulates various user actions. The tool determines which APIs the service has, sends verification requests, uses, where possible, incorrect data (quotes, delimiters, special characters, and more). The dynamic scanner sends and analyzes a large number of requests. The analysis of the sent request and the received response, as well as their comparison with a regular request, allows you to find different security problems. Most scanners have similar functions and modus operandi. Their main components are a crawler and an analyzer. The crawler traverses every link on every page it can reach, examining the contents of files, pressing buttons, and going through a dictionary of possible page names. This process allows you to estimate the size of the attack surface and possible attack vectors taking into account the existing ways of interacting with the application. The analyzer checks the application directly. It can work in passive or active mode. In the first case, the analyzer studies only information that the crawler sends to it. In the second, the analyzer sends requests with incorrect data to the points found by the crawler and to other places that are not currently present on the pages but can be used in the application. It then infers the presence of a vulnerability based on the server's responses. What should you pay attention to when choosing a DAST tool? Scan quality This |
| Envoyé | Oui |
| Condensat | what “headless “throw hack ability able about above access according account accurate actions active acunetix adapt adopt advance advanced advised agent all allow allows already also analysis analysis; analyze analyzer analyzes any api apis appear application applications applied appropriate appropriately approximate approximately appscan are area arranged article assessing at&t attack attacks attention authentication author automated automatic available back based before behaves besides best big bounty briefly bug build built burpsuite but buttons calculate can cannot carried case characteristics characters check checked checks choose choosing ci/cd classic clog close code collect come commands common communication community companies company compare comparison completely components conclusion conditions conduct configure configured conjunction connections consider constantly contain content contents control controlled convenient cope correctly covers crawler crawling create created creation criteria critical cryptojacking currently dangerous dast data database date decisive deep define definitely delimiters depends deployed describe desirable detailed detect determine determines developed developer development devsecops dictionary different directly distribute does down draw drawbacks during dynamic each easily easy effective employ encrypting end ending endorse engineering enter enterprise environment errors especially estimate estimates etc evaluate evaluating every evolving examining example excellent existing extended extensions extensive external extremely factors false fast features figure files find first fledged following form found frameworks free from front full functionality functioning functions generally get goals going good hackers handle handles handy has hashing have head help helpful how html http immediately import important impossible improved include incorrect increase infers influence information initial insert instruments integrate integrated integrating integration interact interacting its key languages large largely launch launched launching lead least let level limit limitations link links list load logged login look lot lower main majority make malicious malware managing manual manually many market maximum may missed mistake mode mode” modes modus money monitor more most much must names necessary need needs nessus netsparker new not noted notice nuances number numerous obtaining offered often one only open operandi options order other others out out” owasp own page pages parameter parameters parse part passive password paths pay penetration perfectly perform periodically personal phishing phone pitfalls places plan plays plenty plugins points popular portal portswigger positions positives possible post practice practices pre presence present pressing problems process product profiles program programmatically programming proportion provide provided proxy quality quickly quite quotes rapid7 ratio reach real receive received recording redirect reduce regular released rely remotely remove report reports request requesting requests required responds response responses responsibility rest result results right role rule rules run running same scan scanner scanners scanners: scanning scans scratch sdks second secure security see select selection sending sends sent sequence server service services set settings several shallow shared should show signatures/patterns similar simulates simultaneous since sites size slow smart social software solely solution solution: solutions some sometimes source special speed stack stage starting steal studies studying such superficial support sure surface swagger system taken taking talk tasks techniques technologies technology tell terms tested testing than them them: themselves then therefore those through time today together too tool tool: tools total training transitions traverses trends two types under understand unique unnecessary update updates use used user users uses using various vectors vendor verification vers |
| Tags | Tool Vulnerability Studies Guideline |
| Stories | |
| Notes | |
| Move | 
|
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris aprés sa publication.
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris sur un précédent.