What penetration testing methodology is best for your cybersecurity career?

In my perspective, opting for Black Box Testing as a penetration testing methodology offers a valuable approach to simulate external hacker attacks. This method, involving a tester with no prior knowledge of the target system, mirrors real-world scenarios. By relying solely on public information, like domain names or IP addresses, testers uncover vulnerabilities using diverse tools and techniques. While Black Box Testing effectively assesses security from an outsider's viewpoint, it may have limitations such as time constraints, cost implications, and the potential oversight of deeper vulnerabilities requiring more in-depth knowledge or access.

Exploring black box testing as a technique to mimic attacks by external hackers lacking insider system knowledge is insightful. This method's strength lies in its ability to evaluate security from an outsider's perspective, making it adept at identifying vulnerabilities that might not be apparent from within. By relying solely on publicly available information, it challenges the system's defenses against real-world threats, uncovering hidden weaknesses.

Black box testing mirrors the unpredictability and resourcefulness of external threats. In modern cybersecurity environments, this method should be leveraged not only to identify overt vulnerabilities but also to assess the efficacy of intrusion detection systems (IDS) and incident response protocols. The real value lies in its ability to mimic the actual attack paths that an attacker with no internal knowledge might exploit, thereby testing the 'visible' security posture of the organization. To mitigate the limitations of black box testing, it is advisable to integrate threat intelligence to prioritize potential targets and automate vulnerability scanning for efficiency.

La meilleur méthode (par là, je parle d'efficience et de rendement) pour une entreprise reste un test en bo?te blanche (White box) pour avoir une vision la plus précise possible dans un temps restreint de test d'intrusion.

Black Box Testing, simulating real-world attacks without system knowledge, boosts problem-solving skills. Ideal for ethical hacking careers, it offers insights into outsider perspectives on security vulnerabilities.

White box testing serves as an exhaustive audit of system integrity from within. With the increasing complexity of software architectures, especially in the era of microservices and cloud computing, white box testing is indispensable. It offers an opportunity to scrutinize the security of the codebase, including third-party libraries and dependencies. Security professionals should utilize static application security testing (SAST) tools to automate the identification of security flaws within the code. Moreover, integrating security in the CI/CD pipeline ensures continuous assessment and aligns with the principles of DevSecOps.

I found the topic of black box testing pretty insightful, capturing the essence of what it's like to approach system security from an external standpoint. The notion that the tester operates with limited knowledge, akin to a real-world intruder, is crucial for authentically assessing a system's defenses. It's fascinating how this method sheds light on vulnerabilities that might not be apparent from the inside but are glaring weaknesses to someone probing from the outside.

White box testing is a method where a tester, like an insider, examines a system with full knowledge. They have access to source code, architecture, design, and documentation to uncover vulnerabilities. This approach is effective for assessing code security and system logic, identifying design flaws missed by other methods. However, it may be complex and biased, as testers may rely heavily on provided information, potentially overlooking certain attack vectors.

A cybersecurity white box audit is critical as it provides a complete and detailed view of the infrastructure, identifying vulnerabilities from an external and internal perspective. This allows for a thorough assessment of systems, revealing potential entry points for threats and providing accurate recommendations for improving security. Its transparency and depth distinguish it as an invaluable tool for strengthening defenses and preparing against real attacks.

White box testing is the most effective for web application assessments, where provide complete access to the app and the code can help expedite the penetration testing process. It isn't necessarily fun though conducting a white box IT or ICS/OT network pentest where everything is just given to you. Most pentesters enjoy a good challenge. At least every once in a while!

A gray box audit is critical in cybersecurity and network teaming because it combines elements of external and internal penetration testing. This provides a more complete and realistic view of an organization's security posture by simulating attacks that could arise from both outside and inside. The key advantage lies in the ability to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses that may go unnoticed in other types of audits, allowing for more effective risk mitigation.

Gray box testing represents the middle ground, acknowledging that attackers might possess partial knowledge. This methodology is particularly relevant when considering insider threats or the increasing incidence of social engineering attacks that leverage limited but significant information. It highlights the importance of the principle of least privilege and the need for robust access controls. By emulating a semi-informed attacker, one can effectively test the resilience of the system against realistic threat scenarios. This is where dynamic application security testing (DAST) tools can complement the process by detecting runtime vulnerabilities.

This piece on gray box testing really brings to light its strategic niche between the black and white box methodologies. By arming testers with limited system insights, it enables a more focused yet exploratory approach to identifying vulnerabilities. This method's capacity to unearth flaws that might not be apparent from either a fully internal or external perspective is particularly noteworthy. It's a compelling read for anyone keen on a nuanced understanding of security testing, emphasizing the importance of a balanced approach in vulnerability assessment.

Gray box testing blends aspects of both black box and white box testing methodologies. Testers possess partial knowledge about the target system or network, such as credentials or functionality, but lack full access to source code or architecture. This approach allows for a focused yet comprehensive attack, exploring various scenarios efficiently. Gray box testing offers a user's perspective on system security, identifying vulnerabilities stemming from flawed implementation or configuration. It strikes a balance between the thoroughness of white box testing and the realism of black box testing.

While not as interesting as black box testing, it is the one type of test most commonly implemented because it help prevents issues in testing occurring and streamlines the process without "giving anything away."

Hybrid testing acknowledges the layered complexity of security threats and the need for a multifaceted defense strategy. It is a holistic approach that aligns with the defensive strategy of defense in depth. In practice, hybrid testing can be orchestrated by using a combination of manual and automated testing strategies, integrating both SAST and DAST approaches, and employing red teaming exercises to test the organization's defensive capabilities comprehensively. This approach also allows for the testing of different attack vectors and the interplay between various system components under diverse attack scenarios.

Hybrid Testing merges Black Box and White Box methods for a full security view, blending external attack simulations with internal system insights. Ideal for roles needing deep understanding of threats and defenses.

This short take on hybrid testing offers an intriguing perspective, illustrating its role in merging diverse penetration testing methods for a holistic security evaluation. This approach's strategic flexibility, catering to varied testing requirements, is a key highlight. Yet, it doesn't shy away from acknowledging the complexities and resource demands that come with such a multifaceted strategy. Overall, the discussion provides a thoughtful examination of hybrid testing's potential to uncover a broader spectrum of vulnerabilities, underlining the continuous innovation needed in cybersecurity practices.

Hybrid testing integrates aspects from black box, white box, and gray box testing methodologies. Testers tailor their level of knowledge and access to match the test's scope, objectives, and resources. This approach offers a comprehensive and realistic evaluation of system security, uncovering vulnerabilities potentially missed by singular methods. However, executing hybrid testing can pose challenges, incur higher costs, and demand versatility, as testers navigate between diverse tools, techniques, and mindsets throughout the assessment process.

Hybrid testing is crucial in cybersecurity because it combines automated and manual testing approaches to identify both known and unknown vulnerabilities. This allows for a more comprehensive and realistic assessment of a system's security, providing a more complete picture of potential threats and enabling a proactive response to risks. In short, it provides greater accuracy and depth than other testing methodologies.

Remember that you're performing the pentest for your client and do the best job you can for them. I always adopt the Kobra Kai model for pentesting. Strike First. Strike Hard. Write an Effective Report.

This question is kind of silly. As a pentester you don't focus on white/black/grey box testing. You focus on how to exploit, recon, move silently, exfiltrate. If you want a career in this space you want to be as diverse and deeply skilled as possible. The more important factors to consider are how well can you test/exploit: network, applications, cloud, social engineer, SaaS platforms, mobile, etc... think of all the possible attack vectors.

Aparte de la modalidad de autenticacíon respecto a los test, hay que tener en cuenta el objetivo de la auditoria, para seguir un marco de referencia u otro. Por ejemplo, se puede hacer una auditoría siguiendo OWASP, OSSTMM, Microsoft Cyber Kill Chain, etc. y a su vez, sobre estos marcos, realizar las distintas aproximaciones que se mencionan de caja negra, gris, etc...

All the methods mentioned above are essesntial. You may want to include Software Composition Anaysis (SCA) for Open Source Code.

When preparing for a Pen-testing engagement. Clear rules of engagement are critical. For both you and your customers, ensure the in-scope and out of scope area are clearly defined and documented. Be willing to share your insights with the customer at the time of negotiation, they will appreciate you sharing your experience. Ensure they fully understand any gaps in the scope they are looking at and any risks identified with the testing process. Carefully document your processes and provide a detailed report consumable by both technical teams and Senior Executives alike.