The topic of AI and automation is hotly contested—in almost every industry, it seems. Education, Tech, the Arts, Finance... amongst all the noise, the argument boils down to something quite simple: Can technology ever “replace” humans? Can AI really create a piece of art with the same emotional impact as a living, breathing person? Can it give the same kind of technical insight as a seasoned expert with years of experience?
When it comes to security testing, the question remains the same. There are so many automated tools out there to cover you on all fronts, but can they ever get down to the nitty-gritty the way an actual ethical hacker could? Many businesses are fine with simply running their data through an automated scanner and calling it a day, but what if we went a step further, brought that human element back into it?
Rise of Automation in Security
Automation has undoubtedly improved efficiency in the cybersecurity industry. Vulnerability scanning, SOAR, and SIEM are all common automated tools that are incredibly enticing—and useful! When companies are looking to stay compliant with security frameworks, they’re looking for speed, scalability, and cost savings. These automated tools hit every box, but are they enough? While automation has brought immense benefits, it's important to recognize its inherent limitations.
The Limitations of Automated Scanning
Speed, scalability, cost savings. All three of those are pretty fantastic reasons to depend on automation for security testing... but what are the limitations?
False Positives/Negatives
“I’m human, not a machine...” but machines aren’t perfect, either. False findings (or lack thereof) are common with automated scanners, and without a human expert to analyze and check those findings, the consequences could be disastrous. Imagine spending money, resources, and time trying to remediate a vulnerability that didn’t actually exist. Or worse, being told by the scanner that everything looks clean, but getting exploited from a vulnerability that was missed. This happened to Equifax in 2017, when their automated vulnerability scanner failed to detect an unpatched Apache Struts vulnerability (CVE-2017-5638), which attackers exploited to access sensitive data of 147 million Americans. The scanner gave the all-clear, but a manual review would’ve likely caught the issue—especially since a patch had already been released. By incorporating a human element to automated security scanning, you’re covering yourself across the board.
Machines Can’t Mimic Human Hacker Behavior
To succeed against hackers, you need to think like a hacker. Automated scanners are incapable of really doing this, and it can cause a real detriment to your security posture. Human hackers are creative problem-solvers who think outside of the box. The scanner IS the box. Experts are able to use automated security tools to supplement their work, but hacking abilities come down to real skill that automation just can’t have.
Compliance vs. Real Security
Automated scanners are great if you just want a quick, one-and-done check off the list of compliance protocols. Compliance is important, and something that every organization should prioritize. But what if you went beyond the bare minimum of compliance to real, actionable security? By having human experts analyze and check the data that runs through scanners, you are actively increasing your security. Now it’s not just checking off a list—it's making sure you’re actually secure with fuller coverage. Why pick one or the other when you can have both?
Why Human Expertise is Irreplaceable in Continuous Pentesting
Hackers have very specific methodologies and theories, and a machine just can’t predict that. By having ethical hackers cover you, they’re using their own tactics against them. These experts have the same skillset and technique as successful hackers—but they choose to use those skills to enhance security. Their creativity and adversarial thinking mean that they find unexpected pathways that a scanner wouldn’t necessarily know to try. Plus, with a customizable approach to hacking, human experts are able to tailor their efforts to each organization they’re securing.
The Power of the Hybrid Approach: Automation + Human Expertise
Automated security scanners are limited by their black-and-white reasoning and distance from the mind of a real-world hacker. Ethical hackers are limited by scope, speed, and cost. But when ethical hackers use automation to supplement their work, not replace it, you get the best of both worlds. With continuous automated scanning, your data is being analyzed 24/7 for vulnerabilities—this gives ethical hackers an idea of what to prioritize, like using a metal detector at the beach. It seems overwhelming trying to find a small object in the billions of grains of sand, but having a tool alert you when it finds something streamlines the process, makes it easier to dig and find treasure. By employing a hybrid approach to security testing, organizations are covering themselves on several fronts, getting multiple sets of eyes on their attack surface, and ultimately taking action to prioritize their own security.
