Image
 
linkedin_logo.png rss_logo.jpg
twitter_logo.png youtube_logo.jpg
Latest Additions
 
EH-Net Login
Welcome Guest.






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
Who's Online
We have 51 guests and 3 members online
 
Advertisement

You are here: Home arrow Featuresarrow /rootarrow The Death of Penetration Testing by Brian Chess in InfoSecurity Magazine
EH-Net
May 24, 2013, 07:19:32 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Go back to The Ethical Hacker Network Online Magazine Home Page
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Death of Penetration Testing by Brian Chess in InfoSecurity Magazine  (Read 8282 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
larryedwardpotter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2



View Profile WWW
« on: March 03, 2009, 09:56:43 AM »

In Brian Chess's column in the back of the January/February issue of InFoSecurity Magazine (but not the online version - http://www.infosecurity-us.com), he claims that "2009 will see the death of pen testing as we know, and love, it."  He gives a few good arguments as to why pen testing in on the verge of an evolutionary metamorphosis that will make it “less distinct but more pervasive."  He further predicts that pen testing will "get wrapped into a much lager and far more comprehensive approach to improving security." 

I don't necessarily think this transformation will occur in 2009, but with our new president’s focus on a federal role in IT security and the other preverbal dominos starting to line up, it is inevitable that pen testing as it gets tied closer to business processes will play a pervasive role in a holistic approach to security management.
Logged

CISSP, CISM, C|EH, GPEN, MCNE, MCSA
Ketchup
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1021



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2009, 10:12:51 AM »

I can definitely see that.  I don't work for a purely infosec company.  We do more forensics than anything.   When we do pen testing, it's almost always as part of a larger sec audit (ISO17799, etc).   If we are doing an audit, it's usually because we were hired to do forensics in response to an incident.   Their problems are usually more procedural than technical.  (Not they don't have technical.)   If IT department goes rogue, the preventative methods are usually more procedural.   
Logged

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ketchup
NickFnord
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2009, 10:18:53 AM »

this sentiment has been arround for a while.  although we all love attacking stuff, it doesn't necessarily prove anything unless there's a more comprehensive approach.

Justin has a great blogpost here explaining why he thinks pen-tests are bullshit.  quite good.
Logged
Kev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 428


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2009, 04:39:09 PM »

Well, if you use the extremely limited and narrow description of the term pent tester as just someone trying to exploit a box, then I would agree. 
Logged
LSOChris
Guest
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2009, 08:03:03 PM »

if you also sell source code auditing software you may feel that way too.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.572 seconds with 23 queries.
 
Exclusive Deal

sansfire13_245x90_cw90.jpg
SANSFIRE 2013
June 15 - 22

5% Off w/ Code: EHN_5

SANS Deals 4 EH-Netters
5% OFF Any SANS Course in Any Format!
Coupon Code: EHN_5 Including SANS Rocky Mountain 2013 & SANS Boston 2013
Polls
Compared to this year, 2013 will be:
 
Recent Forum Topics
EH-Net News Feeds
Latest Additions
 
         
Advertisement

© 2013 The Ethical Hacker Network
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.