Pentesting, a crucial element in cybersecurity, is the abbreviated term for penetration testing. This method stands out as the most efficient approach for long-term system protection, guarding against a variety of cyberattacks.
In this process, a company engages a cybersecurity expert to test its system with the primary objective of identifying potential vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities could be exploited by a malicious actor, someone who steals private information or extorts organizations for financial gain.
The cybersecurity experts hired for these testings are ethical hackers—a professional who leverages hacking abilities for the greater good.
Ethical hackers typically assess the system's vulnerabilities using creative and counterintuitive methods. This approach is necessary because black hat hackers employ similar techniques to carry out attacks. In essence, ethical hackers must think like an attacker or a malicious user.
However, there is more than one way to conduct pentesting: the process can be either manual or automated. What are the differences between these approaches? Which one best aligns with the security needs of each company? What criteria should a company consider when selecting a pentesting method?
The manual pentesting process is addressed by security experts with a deep understanding of systems and creativity, discovering vulnerabilities meticulously. This approach is ideal for companies that prioritize a tailored, hands-on methodology, especially in complex and unique infrastructures.
The human touch ensures a refined examination, uncovering specific and customized risks that automated tools might overlook. For organizations valuing precision in their security strategy, manual pentesting stands as an indispensable ally.
In this mode of penetration testing, security professionals not only detect high impact vulnerabilities but also play a key role in identifying, reporting, and crafting resolutions for high-impact security risks. It is within the realm of manual pentesting that vulnerabilities posing a real and substantial threat to the business are brought to light.
To understand better, is essential to know the main characteristics of the manual pentesting process:
Unlike manual pentesting, automated pentesting offers tools that expedite the vulnerability identification process. This method is ideal for companies seeking a rapid and comprehensive overview of their security posture, especially in large-scale environments.
These tools conduct massive scans, significantly enhancing the efficiency of security analyses. While sacrificing some of the personalization of manual pentesting, the speed and scalability make automated approaches a strategic choice for organizations that face complexities of modern cybersecurity.
Here are the characteristics of the automated pentesting method:
Many companies seek to perform pentesting to comply with the most relevant Compliance certifications at an international level.
For this goal, automated testing may be the best option. At Strike we have the Automated Testing Compliance plan, that runs automated tests and reports to meet the standards of certifications such as SOC2, HIPAA and ISO 27001.
Here's how it works:
On the other hand, compliance standards such as PCI DSS and SWIFT demand a comprehensive assessment of security measures, that requires the human expertise and intuition that manual penetration testers bring to the table. By engaging in a meticulous examination of systems, applications, and network infrastructure, manual pentesting not only satisfies compliance requirements but also ensures a higher level of assurance in identifying and mitigating potential risks, thereby fortifying an organization's overall cybersecurity posture.
The following chart captures the main characteristics of each method, offering a parallel comparison to aid in decision-making.
Whether prioritizing human intelligence or seeking the speed of automated scans, this overview aims to assist organizations in making informed choices aligned with their unique security needs.