SAST vs DAST: Comparing Key Application Security Testing Methods

In today’s fast-paced digital world, cyber threats are evolving rapidly, making application security more critical than ever. Businesses face constant attacks, with hackers targeting vulnerabilities in application source code.

This blog introduces two crucial application testing methodologies in application security testing: Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Understanding the key differences and benefits of SAST and DAST can help you implement a comprehensive application security strategy.

What is Static Application Security Testing?

SAST or static analysis, is a testing methodology that analyzes an application’s source code, binary, or byte code to uncover flaws that can lead to security vulnerabilities. SAST takes place very early in the software development life cycle as it does not require a working application and can take place without code being executed.

What is Dynamic Application Security Testing?

DAST is the process of analyzing a web application during runtime or through the front-end to find vulnerabilities through simulated attacks, mimicking a malicious attacker. By conducting DAST, you can catch vulnerabilities in an application before it’s open to the public.

SAST vs DAST: Advantages and Disadvantages

Static Application Security Testing Advantages:

• Early Detection: Identifies vulnerabilities before the application is run, allowing for early remediation.
• Cost-Effective: Fixing issues early in the development process is generally less expensive than addressing them after deployment.
• Detailed Analysis: Pinpoints the exact lines of code where vulnerabilities exist, making it easier for developers to address specific issues.
• Continuous Monitoring: SAST can be run throughout the development lifecycle, minimizing the risk of vulnerabilities being included in the final application.
  
  

Static Application Security Testing Disadvantages:

• Language Dependency: SAST tools are often tied to specific programming languages, requiring multiple tools for different languages to cover all languages used in different applications.
• False Positives: Despite their speed, SAST tools often generate a high level of false positives, which can be time-consuming to analyze.
• Runtime Limitations: SAST cannot detect issues that arise during runtime, such as authentication issues, which can weaken overall security.
  
  

Dynamic Application Security Testing Advantages:

• Runtime Detection: DAST is capable of identifying runtime security vulnerabilities that static tools may miss, such as configuration and authentication issues, providing a more comprehensive security assessment.
• Language-Agnostic: Can test applications regardless of the programming languages used, making them versatile for various applications.
• Lower False Positives: DAST generally has a lower false-positive rate compared to SAST, leading to more reliable results.
• Third-Party Software Testing: Can evaluate the security of third-party applications, helping mitigate risks from external software.
  
  

Dynamic Application Security Testing Disadvantages:

• Limited Issue Identification: DAST tools can identify that a problem exists but do not specify the exact location of the issue in the source code, making remediation more challenging.
• Longer Scan Times: DAST scans typically take longer to execute, which can be a challenge in fast-paced development environments.
• Higher Remediation Cost: Addressing vulnerabilities found during runtime can be more expensive than fixing them earlier in the development process.
  
  
  

Final Thoughts: Combine SAST and DAST

To achieve comprehensive application security, utilizing both Static Application Security Testing and Dynamic Application Security Testing is essential. These methodologies complement each other, enabling organizations to uncover a broader range of vulnerabilities and significantly reduce security risks.

Advantages of combining SAST and DAST Methodologies

• Comprehensive Coverage: Ensures that both code-level and runtime vulnerabilities are identified and addressed.
• Reduced Risk: Minimizes the risk of vulnerabilities slipping through the cracks, enhancing the overall security posture.
• Improved Security Practices: Encourages a culture of security throughout the development lifecycle, aligning with DevSecOps principles.
  

By prioritizing a combined approach to application security testing, you ensure a thorough examination of your application to protect against a wide range of threats and foster a proactive security culture, safeguarding your business from cyber threats.

Enjoyed reading this blog? Stay updated with our latest exclusive content by following us on Twitter and LinkedIn.