SAST vs DAST in Application Security
In the ever-evolving landscape of application security, it’s crucial to understand the nuances between Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Let’s delve into the key aspects of each approach and their roles in fortifying your application security.
Published Dec 9, 2023
A Quick Comparison 🛡️
Testing Method: Static Analysis of source code, bytecode, or binary code.
Timing: Conducted early in the development phase or at code check-in.
Automation: Highly automated, scanning the source code for potential vulnerabilities.
Coverage: Offers deep code analysis, identifying vulnerabilities at the source code level.
Pros:
- Enables early detection.
- Provides detailed code-level insights.
- Integrates seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines.
- Enables early detection.
- Provides detailed code-level insights.
- Integrates seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines.
DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing):
Testing Method: Dynamic Analysis involving testing a running application.
Timing: Typically performed post-development or post-deployment.
Automation: Mix of automation and manual testing, simulating attacks and assessing the application’s response.
Coverage: Provides insights into vulnerabilities present in a runtime environment.
Pros:
- Mimics real-world scenarios.
- Offers a holistic assessment.
- Covers aspects not addressed by SAST.
- Mimics real-world scenarios.
- Offers a holistic assessment.
- Covers aspects not addressed by SAST.
Conclusion:
While SAST and DAST have distinct strengths, they are often used together for comprehensive security coverage.
SAST early in the development cycle helps catch issues at the source, while DAST, with its real-world simulation, provides a more accurate representation of potential threats in a runtime environment. Integrating both approaches enhances our ability to secure applications effectively.