Software Composition Analysis vs Dynamic Application Security Testing

Developers should use SCA when building applications with open-source libraries to proactively identify security vulnerabilities (e meets developers should use dast during the testing phase of the software development lifecycle to identify runtime security vulnerabilities that static analysis might miss, such as injection flaws, broken authentication, and sensitive data exposure. Here's our take.

Software Composition Analysis

Nice Pick

Developers should use SCA when building applications with open-source libraries to proactively identify security vulnerabilities (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: dependency-management, vulnerability-assessment

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Dynamic Application Security Testing

Developers should use DAST during the testing phase of the software development lifecycle to identify runtime security vulnerabilities that static analysis might miss, such as injection flaws, broken authentication, and sensitive data exposure

Pros

• It is particularly valuable for web applications and APIs exposed to the internet, as it helps ensure compliance with security standards like OWASP Top 10 and PCI-DSS before deployment
• Related to: static-application-security-testing, penetration-testing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Software Composition Analysis is a tool while Dynamic Application Security Testing is a methodology. We picked Software Composition Analysis based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Software Composition Analysis wins

Based on overall popularity. Software Composition Analysis is more widely used, but Dynamic Application Security Testing excels in its own space.