Beyond a Checkmark: Get to Know the True DAST
The recent increase in the number of application security testing tools has caused confusion among buyers and vendors. Some have started to view DAST as just a checkbox item, prioritizing cost over quality. This rush for cheaper options is putting organizations at risk, often without the knowledge of security leaders. It’s time to differentiate between critical DAST and “check-the-box” DAST with the help of an infographic that illustrates the differences.
Navigating the DAST maze
Dynamic application security testing (DAST) encompasses all security testing activities on a live application, whether manual or automated. However, the term “DAST tool” is commonly used to refer to web vulnerability scanners, which vary in quality, purpose, and effectiveness. Broadly speaking, DAST tools can be categorized into three types:
- Pentesting scanners: Single-user scanners for ad-hoc scanning to identify potential issues for further manual testing
- Basic automated scanners: Outdated products that struggle with modern web applications and produce low-quality results
- Comprehensive DAST solutions: Specialized products for automated vulnerability testing that are continuously updated to address current web technologies
The right tool for your needs depends on your specific use case. It’s crucial to differentiate between critical DAST tools that enhance application security and those that are merely used to fulfill a requirement.
The checkbox trap
Vulnerability scanning is essential for security best practices and compliance. However, DAST often ends up as a checkbox item that needs to be ticked, regardless of its accuracy or relevance to your organization. Opting for cheap or open-source DAST tools can leave your organization vulnerable and give a false sense of security. Simply having a tool is not enough to enhance security if it doesn’t effectively identify and address vulnerabilities.
Effective DAST tools can transform your application security posture, while subpar tools may be more harmful than having no DAST in place.
You can’t automate inaccurate results
The primary challenge with automated dynamic testing is ensuring accuracy throughout the scanning process. If the scanning tool is not precise, some vulnerabilities may go undetected. Inaccurate reporting can lead to a false sense of security and wasted resources on non-actionable alerts.
Legacy tools may struggle with modern authentication requirements and dynamic applications, leading to incomplete scans and unreliable results. It’s important to prioritize accuracy in reporting to avoid overlooking critical vulnerabilities.
Shortcuts to meet the checkbox requirement for DAST can backfire, costing time and money without improving security.
There’s no such thing as a free DAST
Automated web vulnerability testing requires continuous research, development, and maintenance to ensure accuracy on diverse application environments. Bundled scanners often lack regular updates and integration capabilities, leading to difficulties in setup and usage.
Basic DAST tools may struggle with authentication requirements and require manual interventions, wasting valuable resources. Custom integrations and data ingestion scripts may be needed, further complicating the process and diminishing the value of the tool.
Getting value from DAST
Every organization needs a reliable DAST tool to scan applications for vulnerabilities. When selecting a solution, consider not only the upfront cost but also the time and effort required to derive value from it. Vendor support plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of your scans and the speed of remediation. A well-configured and actionable DAST can significantly enhance your application security posture.
