<iframe src="//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-WQV6DT" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden">

SECURITY INFLUENCERS BLOG

Security influencers provide real-world insight and “in-the-trenches” experiences on topics ranging from application security to DevOps and risk management

Advantages of Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST) over Static and Dynamic Testing

Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST) works in fundamentally different ways than static or dynamic tools using instrumentation technology. IAST leverages information from inside the running application, including runtime requests, data flow, control flow, libraries, and connections, to find vulnerabilities accurately. Because of this, interactive testing works better for application security. That's why we created Contrast -- to utilize next-generation technology to solve the growing problems inside the application security field. 

Because of this, interactive testing works better for application security. That's why we created Contrast -- to utilize next-generation technology to solve the growing problems inside the application security field. 

So here's the list you've been waiting for...
7 Advantages of IAST over SAST and DAST

  1. False Positives. False positives represent the single biggest weakness in security tools, commonly representing over 50% of the results. False positives increase the workload on scarce security resources and make it difficult to identify the most critical flaws, decreasing the utility of technologically-dated scanners. With interactive testing, access to more data leads to more accurate findings.

  2. Vulnerability Coverage. Let's talk about standard rule sets found in interactive tools. Interactive analysis provides the best of static and dynamic testing. Not only do interactive testing tools focus on the most common and most risky flaws found in applications, but they also allow for custom rules to personalize the threat coverage for specific enterprises.

  3. Code Coverage. Static doesn't examine libraries or frameworks, severely limiting vulnerability analysis. Dynamic can only examine an application's exposed surface. Both static and dynamic miss huge portions of most applications. But interactive testing examines the entire application from the inside -- including the libraries and frameworks. So you get better coverage over your entire codebase.

  4. Scalability. Static and dynamic tools don't scale well. They typically require experts to set up and run the tool as well as interpret the results. But the size and complexity of an application don't affect interactive testing, which can handle extremely large applications in stride.

  5. Instant Feedback. Static and dynamic tools get run on a periodic basis, which means the lag time between the mistake and the vulnerability detection could be weeks, months, or even years. Interactive testing provides instant feedback to a developer, within seconds of coding and testing new code. Developers can be sure they are only checking in "clean" code, saving time and money downstream.

  6. No Experts Required. When you buy something, you just want it to work. Out of the box. No downloads, no updates, no configurations. You just want it to work. That's why interactive tools eliminated the months of configuration, tuning, and customization. With interactive tools, as the application is exercised, the application is tested. Continuously. Automatically. Without you doing anything extra.

  7. Zero Process Disruption. Businesses put a premium on time-to-market. Agile and DevOps strategies limit testing time. Because interactive testing operate transparently during normal QA or unit testing, there is no process disruption. Interactive application security testing leverages existing activities to add security testing without separate disruptive activities or schedule breaking checkpoints.

 

continuous-application-security-testing
Jeff Williams, Co-Founder, Chief Technology Officer

Jeff Williams, Co-Founder, Chief Technology Officer

Jeff brings more than 20 years of security leadership experience as co-founder and Chief Technology Officer of Contrast. In 2002, Jeff co-founded and became CEO of Aspect Security, a successful and innovative consulting company focused on application security. Jeff is also a founder and major contributor to OWASP, where he served as the Chair of the OWASP Board for 8 years.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG

Learn how to unify security strategy across & development operations. See how to set up a CAS program with only eight activities!

Download the Handbook