What are the drawbacks of automated network security testing?

1 Limited scope

One of the drawbacks of automated network security testing is that it cannot cover all the aspects of network security that require human judgment, creativity, and intuition. For example, automated tools may not be able to detect logical flaws, business logic errors, or social engineering attacks that exploit human weaknesses. Automated tools may also miss some vulnerabilities that are specific to the network environment, configuration, or architecture. Therefore, automated network security testing should not be used as a substitute for manual testing, but rather as a complement to it. Manual testing can provide a deeper and more comprehensive analysis of network security issues that automated tools may overlook or misinterpret.

2 False positives and negatives

Another drawback of automated network security testing is that it can generate false positives and false negatives, which can affect the accuracy and reliability of the test results. False positives are when automated tools report vulnerabilities that do not exist or are not exploitable, while false negatives are when automated tools fail to report vulnerabilities that do exist and are exploitable. False positives can waste time and resources by diverting attention from real threats, while false negatives can create a false sense of security by leaving critical vulnerabilities unaddressed. Therefore, automated network security testing should not be trusted blindly, but rather verified and validated by human experts. Human experts can filter out false positives and negatives by reviewing the test reports, checking the evidence, and conducting manual verification.

3 Dependency and maintenance

A third drawback of automated network security testing is that it can create dependency and maintenance issues that can affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the testing process. Dependency issues arise when automated tools become outdated, incompatible, or unavailable due to changes in the network system, technology, or standards. Maintenance issues arise when automated tools require constant updates, patches, or configuration to keep up with the evolving network security landscape. Therefore, automated network security testing should not be used as a one-time solution, but rather as a continuous and dynamic process. Network security testers should keep track of the changes in the network system and the automated tools, and adjust the testing strategy accordingly.

4 Ethical and legal implications

A fourth drawback of automated network security testing is that it can raise ethical and legal implications that can affect the reputation and credibility of the network security testers. Ethical implications arise when automated tools perform unauthorized, intrusive, or disruptive tests that violate the privacy, consent, or property rights of the network owners, users, or third parties. Legal implications arise when automated tools break the laws, regulations, or contracts that govern the network security testing activities, such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the General Data Protection Regulation, or the Service Level Agreement. Therefore, automated network security testing should not be used without proper authorization, permission, and disclosure. Network security testers should follow the ethical and legal guidelines and best practices for network security testing, such as the NIST SP 800-115, the OWASP Testing Guide, or the ISACA Code of Ethics.

5 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?