What do you like better Web penetration testing or static code analysis?

[brian at fortify.com (Brian Chess)]

I like your point Matt.  Everybody who's responded thus-far has wanted to
turn this into a discussion about what's most effective or what has the most
benefit, sort of like we were comparing which icky medicine to take or which
overcooked vegetable to eat.  Maybe they don't get any pleasure from the
work itself.

It sounds as though you need to change up your static analysis style.  A few
years back we ran competitions at BlackHat where we found we could identify
and exploit vulnerabilities starting from static analysis just as quickly as
from fuzzing.  Here?s an overview:
    
http://reddevnews.com/Blogs/Desmond-File/2008/08/Iron-Chef-Competition-at-Bl
ack-Hat-Cooks-Up-Security-Goodness.aspx

Interviews with Charlie Miller and Sean Fay:
http://blog.fortify.com/blog/2009/05/02/Iron-Chef-Interviews-Part-1-Charlie-
Miller-1-2    
http://blog.fortify.com/blog/2009/05/02/Iron-Chef-Interviews-Part-2-Sean-Fay

Brian

On 4/23/10 7:05 AM, "Matt Parsons" <mparsons1980 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Gary,
> I was not stating which was better for security.  I was stating what I
> thought was more fun.   I feel that penetration testing is sexier.  I find
> penetration testing like driving a Ferrari and static code analysis like
> driving a Ford Taurus.   I believe with everyone else on this list that
> software security needs to be integrated early in the development life
> cycle.  I have also read most of your books and agree with your findings.
> As you would say I don't think that penetration testing is magic security
> pixie dust but it is fun when you are doing it legally and ethically.  My
> two cents.
> Matt
>
>
> Matt Parsons, MSM, CISSP
> 315-559-3588 Blackberry
> 817-294-3789 Home office
> "Do Good and Fear No Man"
> Fort Worth, Texas
> A.K.A The Keyboard Cowboy
> mailto:mparsons1980 at gmail.com
> http://www.parsonsisconsulting.com
> http://www.o2-ounceopen.com/o2-power-users/
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/parsonsconsulting
> http://parsonsisconsulting.blogspot.com/
> http://www.vimeo.com/8939668
> http://twitter.com/parsonsmatt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sc-l-bounces at securecoding.org [mailto:sc-l-bounces at securecoding.org]
> On Behalf Of Gary McGraw
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 2:15 PM
> To: Peter Neumann; Secure Code Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [SC-L] What do you like better Web penetration testing or
> static code analysis?
>
> I hereby resonate with my esteemed colleague and mentor pgn.  But no puns
> from me.
>
> gem
>
>
> On 4/22/10 1:57 PM, "Peter Neumann" <neumann at csl.sri.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Matt Parsons wrote:
> > What do you like doing better as application security professionals, web
> > penetration testing or static code analysis?
>
> McGovern, James F. (P+C Technology) wrote:
> > Should a security professional have a preference when both have
> > different value propositions? While there is overlap, a static analysis
> > tool can find things that pen testing tools cannot. Likewise, a pen test
> > can report on secure applications deployed insecurely which is not
> > visible to static analysis.
> >
> > So, the best answer is I prefer both...
>
> Both is better than either one by itself, but I think Gary McGraw
> would resonate with my seemingly contrary answer:
>
>   BOTH penetration testing AND static code analysis are still looking
>   at the WRONG END of the horse AFTER it has left the DEVELOPMENT BARN.
>   Gary and I and many others have for a very long time been advocated
>   security architectures and development practices that greatly enhance
>   INHERENT TRUSTWORTHINESS, long before anyone has to even think about
>   penetration testing and static code analysis.
>
>   This discussion is somewhat akin to arguments about who has the best
>   malware detection.  If system developers (past-Multics) had paid any
>   attention to system architectures and sound system development
>   practices, viruses and worms would be mostly a nonproblem!
>
>   Please pardon my soapbox.
>
>     The past survives.
>     The archives
>     have lives,
>     not knives.
>     High fives!
>
>     (I strive
>     to thrive
>     with jive.)
>
> PGN
> _______________________________________________
> Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L at securecoding.org
> List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
> List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
> SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
> as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
> Follow KRvW Associates on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/KRvW_Associates
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L at securecoding.org
> List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
> List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
> SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
> as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
> Follow KRvW Associates on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/KRvW_Associates
> _______________________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L at securecoding.org
> List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
> List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
> SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com)
> as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community.
> Follow KRvW Associates on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/KRvW_Associates
> _______________________________________________