September 20, 2022



Separate Ways, but Not Worlds Apart: A Journey to Friendlier Pentesting

As an offensive security professional, one can often face unique challenges compared to colleagues in the rest of the information technology space. After all, why wouldn’t you - hacking is scary stuff that you see the bad guys and anti-heroes do in movies, right?! While that trope seems silly to type out, particularly for a reader in the know, the reality is that your average person’s reaction is not far from that exact insinuation. Any penetration tester foolish enough to talk about their job to family or strangers has been asked if they could hack phones, Facebook accounts and the like by those without knowledge of the discipline. From personal experience, they don’t stop believin’ even when you tell them it’s not that simple.

While your fellows in the computer industry will generally not be that out of touch, your everyman’s perception of “hacking” illustrates an important point to consider professionally; that a lack of information can cause people to misunderstand the role of ethical hacking. From the perspective of a penetration tester, this is a pertinent thing to recognize, because these impressions made by media or prior negative experiences can create an adversarial relationship before you ever interact. To invoke some of the most common:


  • System Administrator: Wild and free hackers diving into a network that I built and maintain feels like a lose-lose for me - me and my team have tons of preparation ahead of us and will need to scramble to fix issues after they’re done.


  • Developer: I’ve written my code in accordance with my organization’s needs and development standards, and my commits pass every pipeline security check, so why do hackers need to double check my work? Having to fix underlying issues in our code base will add tons of tech debt…


  • System Owner: Why do they need access from the inside? This assessment is only going to result in my bosses criticizing me and my team for any issue they uncover. We’re in compliance regulations and our authorizing official or CISO approved our product, so why do we need another layer of scrutiny? I’ll be alright without you!


Here’s the honest reality - in many cases, none of these thoughts are really incorrect! There’s a significant difference between a communicative, improvement-driven penetration test versus a results-driven engagement focused on getting as many “wins” as possible. While these two things can happen effectively in concert, too often are offensive security assessments only the latter. While going full bore with no communication has its time and place (an internal red team assessment, for example), this engagement style can sour relationships with stakeholders and validate some of the fears mentioned above.


On the other hand, a capable and mature offensive security team has the capability to gain and keep the trust of every stakeholder described above when an appropriately light touch is used. The guiding principle to keep in mind is that penetration testing someone’s system is like holding their baby; you’re being trusted to be hands on with something very important to them that’s taken sweat and tears to create. Following the childcare analogy, making it clear that you’re on someone’s side and know what you’re doing is the best way to assuage their fears when you come to them with open arms.


In the same way that conducting a penetration test is an iterative, evolving process, making an ally of your testees is a wheel that keeps on turning from initial interactions to the latest remediation testing. Let’s cover what that looks like throughout the length of an engagement.