Skip to content

Comparing SAST and DAST: Key Differences in Security Testing Explained

Original Post: SAST vs. DAST for Security Testing: Unveiling the Differences

The content discusses Application Security Testing (AST), emphasizing two key approaches: Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST).

  • SAST employs a white-box testing method to analyze binary code for vulnerabilities and coding errors early in the software development lifecycle. It facilitates early detection, offers real-time feedback, and ensures high accuracy. Common vulnerabilities detected include buffer overflows and cross-site scripting. However, it doesn’t identify runtime vulnerabilities.

  • DAST, by contrast, uses a black-box testing method to simulate attacks, assessing the application’s response to detect runtime vulnerabilities. It is language-agnostic, has low false-positive rates, and doesn’t require access to the application’s binary code.

The document highlights the complementary strengths of SAST and DAST and recommends using both for a robust security posture. Combining SAST for early development stages and DAST for staging environments enhances overall security. The Veracode Intelligent Software Security Platform is suggested for integrating both testing methods efficiently.

Finally, it promotes Veracode’s unified, cloud-native platform that automates the identification and remediation of security vulnerabilities, offering tools to streamline the use of DAST and SAST.

Go here to read the Original Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exit mobile version