Blog
The anti-phishing data show that in the context of constantly changing threats, organizations need to be ready for the protection of their systems and information. Two fundamental blocks of a proper security plan are Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). But what exactly are these methods, and how are they distinguished from one another? More significantly though, how can they be optimally used and that, in combination with automated penetration testing? In this special guide, we will discuss SAST vs DAST and learn more about how Prancer, a top cloud security solution, utilizes SAST and DAST in its security solutions.
But nowadays, application security is a mandatory element most business plans and strategies cannot exist without. As seen today, threats are more advanced than before, and as such, there is a need to enhance good security measures. SAST and DAST are two popular testing methodologies that can be used to find weaknesses in applications. But how do they work, and which one is the right for your organization? This article will also analyze the SAST and DAST to define their position in the security context.
Static Analysis is a secure software development life cycle used to identify security flaws in an application without running the code, or it involves analyzing source code, byte code, or even binary code. Try to imagine it as a general check-up of your application’s internal organization and, perhaps, some prevention of potential issues. SAST tools scan the source code in the early stages of the SDLC and look for vulnerabilities before an application is live.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) on the other hand is the testing that is carried out on the defined runtime environment of the application. While SAST analyzes the code in its source state, DAST works in a runtime manner, mimicing the attacks to find out the issues.
DAST tools work on the assumption that they are outside the application – like a hacker – and therefore, find vulnerabilities that are not evident from the code. This method is useful for revealing problems connected with the application’s functioning, including improper configurations, authentication problems, and other runtime weaknesses.
In the case of SAST vs DAST, it must be mentioned that both are very different from each other and are used at different stages of the process. SAST is preventive, it finds the vulnerabilities before the development of the application, while DAST is detective, it finds them when the application is fully developed and is active.
The two approaches are very important, but the impact of each depends on the method used in application and the times when it is exercised. Knowledge of what these two have strengths and weaknesses will assist organizations such as Prancer in coming up with a stronger security strategy.
Automated penetration testing should be considered an integral part of the security strategy. While SAST and DAST are designed to look for flaws, and inform a team of such weaknesses, automated penetration testing imitates real-life attack scenarios to know how an application will perform against real threats.
This is why at the Prancer we are aware that security is never a ‘blanket’ solution. That is why SAST, DAST and automated penetration testing are embedded in our security measures. This is the reason we offer a two-tier defense strategy that considers both the internal and external threats that an application has.
Elevate your cybersecurity with Prancer! Sign up now and start your free trial today!
The integration of SAST and DAST has several advantages for the organizations who want to improve the security of systems and applications. Such an approach gives a rather holistic picture of an application’s weaknesses at the code level and at runtime.
The integration of SAST and DAST has several advantages for the organizations who want to improve the security of systems and applications. Such an approach gives a rather holistic picture of an application’s weaknesses at the code level and at runtime.
Despite the effectiveness of SAST and DAST, there are some hurdles that are experienced. It is therefore important to understand these challenges to improve the usage of these tools.
Hence, there is evidence that Prancer is well-prepared to address the issues that are related to SAST and DAST. Our team of experts always engage the clients to increase efficiency of the security testing tools and come up with ways of avoiding a high number of false positives.
It is therefore important that, as new and more sophisticated threats materialize on the cyberspace horizon, so do the techniques and technologies used to counter them. The future of application security will most probably be marked by an increased use of automated solutions incorporating AI and machine learning technologies.
These are some of the new trends at Prancer, and we are always in the process of modifying our security measures. The implementation of the best technologies that are current in the market guarantees our clients are shielded against the existing and the emerging risks.
At Prancer, we do not agree with the notion of making security an add-on on the products that we design and develop. With the help of SAST, DAST and automated penetration testing we offer our clients complete security assurance for their applications right from the start.
As for the SAST vs DAST debate, it is necessary to understand that both approaches are critical for the security of an organization. Combined with the automated penetration testing, the above methods make the security position of businesses more comprehensive. Prancer is dedicated to assisting enterprises in facing this security landscape, providing services that may address the short-term and long-term challenges.
