Automated Security Scanning vs Manual Security Testing

Developers should use automated security scanning to integrate security into their DevOps workflows (DevSecOps), ensuring continuous security assessment throughout development and deployment meets developers should learn manual security testing to enhance application security by finding subtle vulnerabilities like business logic errors, authentication bypasses, or session management issues that automated scanners often overlook. Here's our take.

Automated Security Scanning

Nice Pick

Developers should use automated security scanning to integrate security into their DevOps workflows (DevSecOps), ensuring continuous security assessment throughout development and deployment

Pros

• It is critical for compliance with standards like OWASP Top 10, PCI-DSS, or GDPR, and for preventing costly breaches in production environments by catching vulnerabilities in code, containers, APIs, or infrastructure as code (IaC)
• Related to: static-application-security-testing, dynamic-application-security-testing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Manual Security Testing

Developers should learn manual security testing to enhance application security by finding subtle vulnerabilities like business logic errors, authentication bypasses, or session management issues that automated scanners often overlook

Pros

• It is crucial in high-risk environments such as financial systems, healthcare applications, or critical infrastructure, where thorough security validation is required before deployment
• Related to: owasp-top-10, penetration-testing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Automated Security Scanning is a tool while Manual Security Testing is a methodology. We picked Automated Security Scanning based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Automated Security Scanning wins

Based on overall popularity. Automated Security Scanning is more widely used, but Manual Security Testing excels in its own space.