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: Comparison report on web app security scanners |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 16 May 2006 17:30:07 +0200 |
In response to the postings by Bogdan Calin of Acunetix and Ory Segal of Watchfire (i.e. web security scanner vendors), I agree with them that Webgoat is not a good benchmark application, as are the other "web security training applications". However, what's the alternative? Certainly not the vendor-controlled and vendor-operated online test applications most tool vendors offer. Maybe OWASP SiteGenerator can be used here once it is finished, provided that all tool vendors can agree on what constitutes a "fair" application (an agreement I would not bet my life on, however). However, SiteGenerator was not available when I did my tools comparison. For the time being (or, more exactly, for the time of last fall when I did my comparison), I did not see a better alternative than using Webgoat (for its breadth of vulnerabilities) plus a more "typical", i.e. production application. While I cannot disclose any details about that other application (remember that the tools _did_ find some vulnerabilities in that one, and the operator of that application does not want to be connected in any way with those), you read read in my report that the tools did not do much different on that application - in both cases, their performance left a lot to be desired. If you consider buying a web app scanner to secure a certain application of yours, I advise you by all means to try the scanner on your application, not on any arbitrary benchmark. Tool performance varies wildly with the application, so pay close attention to your specific situation. Best wishes for your tool activities, Holger Peine -- Dr. Holger Peine, Security and Safety Fraunhofer IESE, Fraunhofer-Platz 1, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany Phone +49-631-6800-2134, Fax -1299 (shared) PGP key via http://pgp.mit.edu ; fingerprint is 1BFA 30CB E3ED BA99 E7AE 2BBB C126 A592 48EA F9F8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: Watchfire Watchfire named worldwide market share leader in web application security assessment by leading market research firm. Watchfire's AppScan is the industry's first and leading web application security testing suite, and the only solution to provide comprehensive remediation tasks at every level of the application. See for yourself. Download a Free Trial of AppScan 6.0 today! https://www.watchfire.com/securearea/appscansix.aspx?id=701300000007t9c --------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Previous by Date: | RE: Comparison report on web app security scanners, Mark Curphey |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Comparison report on web app security scanners, Ory Segal |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Comparison report on web app security scanners, Bogdan Calin |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Comparison report on web app security scanners, Ory Segal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |