From: John Reno (jreno@cenzic.com)
Date: Wed May 09 2007 - 17:20:23 EDT
Mathijs,
Cenzic provides a sample application called CrackMeBank modeled after a
financial services site that is useful for conducting assessments and
evaluating products. It can be found at http://crackme.cenzic.com.
The product itself is Cenzic Hailstorm. We have a broad cross-section
of users, but in the pen-test area what customers have found powerful is
the ability to specify parameters on an attack by attack basis to meet
their particular needs. The ability to render the response in the
product's browser is also useful in the validation and remediation
process. There are many other capabilities, you can try for yourself.
John Reno
Cenzic
-----Original Message-----
From: listbounce@securityfocus.com [mailto:listbounce@securityfocus.com]
On Behalf Of M. Groen
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 11:28 PM
To: pen-test@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Opinions of automated testers
Thanks for the clear explanation.
One other question, does anyone happen to know if there are sites on
which
you can try "pen testing" products, like WebInspect, or Hailstorm? I
mean
a " playground" on which it is allowed to do pen-tensting (and make
mistakes)?
Mathijs
> Zack,
>
> First of all, it depends on what you want in a pen-test tool. Second,
it
> also depends on what you mean by pen-testing. In my opinion, unless
there
> is an actual exploit leveraged and a payload or injection of some
sort,
> you
> are talking Vulnerability Assessment and not pen-testing. It's a
semantic
> difference to some but there is a procedural difference between
> identifying
> potential vulnerabilities and actively exploiting found
vulnerabilities.
>
> The 3 tools you list are all web application-centric in their focus
and
> are
> not what I would consider true pen-testing tools per se; they are more
> Application layer vulnerability scanners with limited exploit payloads
to
> reduce false positive findings (XSS and SQL injection checks etc).
> Watchfire's AppScan, Cenzic's Hailstorm, and SPI's WebInspect are all
> great
> tools but they do not test the full gamut of OS or services. If you
are
> focused solely on application layer assessment then any of these 3
should
> suit your needs. I personally prefer WebInspect due to some of the
extra
> tools and functionality it provides, as well as the various
customizable
> report patterns and compliancy-directed scanning but each has it's
strong
> points.
>
> If you are looking for what most on the list would consider broad
spectrum
> pen-testing tools you should take a look at Core Impact or Metasploit.
> There
> are other pen-testing tools available but these two are probably the
most
> widely used. Core=commercial, Metasploit=OSS so if your organization
needs
> support not found in a chat room or online forum Core is the way to
go.
> I'm
> fond of how Impact's payload is a memory-resident compromise so there
is
> no
> actual change to the target compromised system and it can use any
> exploited
> box found to search out other machines it can see which is valuable in
> moving your penetration farther into the private network.
>
> While automated tools are getting better and easier to use, nothing
beats
> an
> experienced pen-testing services company. The better ones go beyond
> automated tool runs and can offer services that include social
> engineering,
> custom exploit coding, and other company-specific scope needs.
Depending
> on
> your budget you may also want to look into that avenue.
>
> Hope that helps and welcome to the list.
>
>
> --
> Erin Carroll
> Moderator
> SecurityFocus pen-test list
> "Do Not Taunt Happy-Fun Ball"
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: listbounce@securityfocus.com
>> [mailto:listbounce@securityfocus.com] On Behalf Of
>> zackpeters75@yahoo.com
>> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:58 PM
>> To: pen-test@securityfocus.com
>> Subject: Opinions of automated testers
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> My manager gave me our pen testing project and I'm still
>> coming up to speed so forgive me if this question is not 100%
>> list appropriate.
>>
>> >From what I can tell the top 3 automated pen testing
>> programs are from SPI Dynamics, Cenzic and Watchfire. I
>> haven't evaled any of them quite yet but they each seem to
>> have their advantages and disadvantages. Cenzic is claiming
>> to be the most accurate at least according to their 20/20
>> marketing program
>> http://www.cenzic.com/forms/ec.php?pubid=10076 but I'm
>> wondering what people have actually seen.
>>
>> And if any of you posters from SPI, Cenzic or Watchfire want
>> to email me directly and tell me your benefits, that's fine.
>> I don't want the thread to be a sales pitch, just looking to
>> benefit from the knowledge of others.
>>
>> Thanks everyone!
>>
>> Zack
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>> This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
>>
>> Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
>> Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic See HOW Now with
>> our 20/20 program!
>>
>> http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
>
> Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
> Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic
> See HOW Now with our 20/20 program!
>
> http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic
See HOW Now with our 20/20 program!
http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic
See HOW Now with our 20/20 program!
http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Apr 12 2008 - 10:57:47 EDT