Fri. 15 Mar.
SeCops
Businesses are facing a constant increase in cyber threats, making it crucial to regularly test the security of their systems. Penetration testing (pentest) has long been the preferred method for assessing security vulnerabilities. Today, automation through Breach & Attack Simulation (BAS) and Attack Surface Management (ASM) platforms is emerging as an essential and effective complement to traditional pentesting approaches.
Limitations of Traditional Pentesting
Pentesting involves replicating hacker attacks on a system to identify exploitable vulnerabilities. While effective, it’s a focused and isolated approach with limitations that are increasingly seen as obstacles:
- High Cost and Duration: Pentesting requires experts to perform technical actions, analyze results, draft reports, and present findings over several days. This process involves costly resources.
- Variable Expertise: With the rapid evolution of IT environments (cloud, virtualization, PaaS, IaaS, APIs), the skill level required for pentesters is constantly rising. Due to a shortage of talent, training new auditors does not fully meet the growing demand.
- Limited Unitary Testing: Pentests are usually conducted system by system or application by application, which doesn’t allow for effective coverage of the entire infrastructure. They provide only a snapshot of a part of an ever-changing environment.
- Increased Regulatory Compliance: Regulations (such as NIS2, DORA, or TIBER-FR) require more frequent and extensive testing, increasing the workload for companies and placing added strain on the availability of experts.
Breach & Attack Simulation: Automation for Cyber Optimization
Breach & Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are transforming how security is controlled. By continuously simulating attacks across all systems, BAS enables comprehensive assessments of vulnerabilities and risks, providing substantial benefits for users:
- Real-Time Results: Attack simulations offer an instant view of an organization’s exposure to threats, allowing for quick responses and adjustments to security strategies based on new attack tactics and techniques.
- Broad, Repetitive Coverage: Unlike pentesting, BAS solutions automate testing across the entire infrastructure, identifying vulnerabilities across a wider attack surface. The most exposed assets are quickly pinpointed, helping prioritize human intervention.
- Resource Optimization: BAS results allow human audits to focus where they are truly needed, namely on poorly defended environments or areas of strategic interest to potential attackers.
- Enhanced SOC Monitoring: BAS platforms help identify blind spots in monitoring systems, ensuring the effectiveness of detection scenarios and improving defenses against increasingly sophisticated attack techniques.
Why Combine the Two Approaches?
While BAS automates and optimizes testing, pentesting remains essential for compliance audits and specific security evaluations. By combining these two approaches, companies can maximize test coverage, strengthen the relevance of technical audits, and optimize budget usage.
Conclusion
The choice between pentesting and Breach & Attack Simulation depends on each organization’s specific needs. While pentesting remains crucial for regulatory audits, integrating a BAS platform provides a modern and efficient approach for proactive security. By leveraging automation, businesses can enhance resilience to cyber threats, confidently meet compliance requirements, and optimize budget commitments.
