Security Testing

Automated vs Manual Security Testing - How to Choose the Best Test at Scale

Create an automated list of testing actions to scale your security testing programme.
Thomas Ballin
4 minute read

Finding the right testing method

Fifteen years ago there were few automated security tools to leverage and so manual testing was the prominent method for security testing. However, these days that's not the case. Automated testing tools like Burp Suite, SQL Map and Nessus Vulnerability Scanner can now perform, on average, 80% of manual capabilities. But that’s not to say automation has eradicated the need for manual tests. 

The remaining 20% of manual processes have a stronghold within security testing strategies. For example, business logic flaws and authentication & access control weaknesses cannot be found by automated tests alone.  So instead of fearing the rise of automated tools, the most efficient security teams are finding the balance between automated and manual testing.  

But how do you effectively prioritise which test to make and which method to use?

Analysing the development change

A useful place to start is the change log of the environment. Or, even better, the submitted pull request before the change takes effect. Here you can understand the types of changes being introduced and the most appropriate tests for them. For example, will the change likely introduce an SQL injection vulnerability or business logic flaw? As mentioned above, we know that a manual test would be the most appropriate approach for these. 

This is important as, ultimately, this is where testing efficiency is maximised. Testing at the source and time of change means no context is lost. Moreover, understanding the capacity of your automated tools is key in quickly identifying what to test and which tool to use. The alternative is to blanket test without clear direction, risking vulnerabilities slipping through the net and time being wasted. 

But how can you quickly assess each development change at scale?

Classifying potential vulnerabilities

To scale and automate this process, utilise technology to classify changes into ‘buckets’ based on the type of vulnerability likely to be introduced. This has really taken off in the last couple of years when LLM's  have become more prevalent. The result is an automated list of changes made, vulnerabilities that are likely to have been introduced, and an informed testing plan of automated or manual tests. This automatic  interpretation and classification of pull requests hugely reduces MTTD and prevents vulnerabilities from entering a live environment. 

Summary

There is a strong place for both automatic and manual tests to operate in unison. Companies can utilise technology to create a set of specific testing actions that highlight which test to use and where. 

Testing earlier in the development process gives security teams a head start in finding vulnerabilities, makes them easier to fix and reduces the chance of unmanageable vulnerability backlogs.

Security Testing

Automated vs Manual Security Testing - How to Choose the Best Test at Scale

Create an automated list of testing actions to scale your security testing programme.
Thomas Ballin
3
min read
two white dot

Finding the right testing method

Fifteen years ago there were few automated security tools to leverage and so manual testing was the prominent method for security testing. However, these days that's not the case. Automated testing tools like Burp Suite, SQL Map and Nessus Vulnerability Scanner can now perform, on average, 80% of manual capabilities. But that’s not to say automation has eradicated the need for manual tests. 

The remaining 20% of manual processes have a stronghold within security testing strategies. For example, business logic flaws and authentication & access control weaknesses cannot be found by automated tests alone.  So instead of fearing the rise of automated tools, the most efficient security teams are finding the balance between automated and manual testing.  

But how do you effectively prioritise which test to make and which method to use?

Analysing the development change

A useful place to start is the change log of the environment. Or, even better, the submitted pull request before the change takes effect. Here you can understand the types of changes being introduced and the most appropriate tests for them. For example, will the change likely introduce an SQL injection vulnerability or business logic flaw? As mentioned above, we know that a manual test would be the most appropriate approach for these. 

This is important as, ultimately, this is where testing efficiency is maximised. Testing at the source and time of change means no context is lost. Moreover, understanding the capacity of your automated tools is key in quickly identifying what to test and which tool to use. The alternative is to blanket test without clear direction, risking vulnerabilities slipping through the net and time being wasted. 

But how can you quickly assess each development change at scale?

Classifying potential vulnerabilities

To scale and automate this process, utilise technology to classify changes into ‘buckets’ based on the type of vulnerability likely to be introduced. This has really taken off in the last couple of years when LLM's  have become more prevalent. The result is an automated list of changes made, vulnerabilities that are likely to have been introduced, and an informed testing plan of automated or manual tests. This automatic  interpretation and classification of pull requests hugely reduces MTTD and prevents vulnerabilities from entering a live environment. 

Summary

There is a strong place for both automatic and manual tests to operate in unison. Companies can utilise technology to create a set of specific testing actions that highlight which test to use and where. 

Testing earlier in the development process gives security teams a head start in finding vulnerabilities, makes them easier to fix and reduces the chance of unmanageable vulnerability backlogs.

Prioritise Your Testing Programme Around Your Development Schedule

Detect Vulnerabilities Faster
Patch Vulnerabilities Faste
Be more compliant
Book a Demo

Related Posts

Vulnerability Management
How do you understand performance over time?
In order to get to grips with the performance of your software or product over time, you really need to be taking incremental measurements of your cybersecurity.
Thomas Ballin
February 2, 2021
Security Testing
Automated penetration testing - 5 key business benefits
Automated penetration testing is becoming increasingly popular. But how does this compare to manual penetration testing? Understand the main key benefits.
Thomas Ballin
June 4, 2024
Vulnerability Management
Will there come a day where there are 0 vulnerabilities to find?
There's a growing potential for AI to remove many sources of vulnerabilities, but does that mean we're going to see a day where code is being written without any vulnerabilities being introduced into systems?
Thomas Ballin
June 4, 2024
cytix frame image
By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information.