Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: rules of engagement scope |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 18 May 2006 08:45:10 -0400 |
Sol.
Ivan Arce wrote:
Frankly I don't see what kind of logical reasoning leads from defining the scope for a penetration test ex-ante to committing fraud, maybe I need some rest to ponder about these things more seriously.
Disregarding what is exactly disclosed after a penetration test (and to whom), which is what you are driving towards the fraud conclusion, a precise definition of scope *before* engaging in a penetration test aims at: - providing good data for precise estimation of cost, time, effort - providing a good indication of desired focus - providing a good indication of desired depth - providing a good indication of undesired breadth
All of the above are NOT independent variables that can be considered separately. Finding the optimal mix for a given organization and the best suited team for that mix is the key to differentiate a good penetration test from a lousy one.
-ivan
mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Rules of Engagement Scope is as absurd as legally shredding audit papers.
Let me give you an example.
Pen-Tests are usually performed after a vulnerability test, which is done to support a financial audit, which is used to provide shareholders definite information regarding the stability of an organization.
If an organization requires a limited scope pen-test without disclosure wouldn't this constitute as a lie? Think about this just for a second. If you sign a Government form and there are mistakes on the form then you can be charged with FRAUD.
So if an organization establishes 'ROE' that sets a limited scope on the pen-test without public disclosure, why is that different than FRAUD?
National Security?
MHO is that pen-tests are as important as the certified financial statements used by organizations and should have public disclaimers of ROE. When an organization is audited with certain constraints that information is or should be disclosed within those statements.
Information that is not disclosed regarding these limitations to me is considered FRAUD!
But then, that's just my opinion I could be monitored, jailed, fined and detained.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
Concerned about Web Application Security? Why not go with the #1 solution
- Cenzic, the only one to win the Analyst's Choice Award from eWeek. As
attacks through web applications continue to rise, you need to
proactively protect your applications from hackers. Cenzic has the most
comprehensive solutions to meet your application security penetration testing and vulnerability management needs. You have an option to go with
a managed service (Cenzic ClickToSecure) or an enterprise software (Cenzic Hailstorm). Download FREE whitepaper on how a managed service can
help you: http://www.cenzic.com/news_events/wpappsec.php And, now for a
limited time we can do a FREE audit for you to confirm your results from
other product. Contact us at request@cenzic.com for details. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: rules of engagement scope, Michael Sierchio |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | How to pentest Skype?, 4secure |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: rules of engagement scope, Ivan Arce |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Re: rules of engagement scope, mr . nasty |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |