SAST vs. PENETRATION TESTING
SAST allows developers and product owners to find vulnerabilities in the development phase. A SAST is a “white box” type of test. It performs on the source code level. A typical penetration test can find more vulnerabilities than a SAST can. In addition, SAST can dig into code quality, maintainability, and reusability. The SAST tool examines source code to find and monitor flaws. It also helps find the flaws in the early phase of development.
Penetration Testing has been the main tool to protect software for a long time. Many companies depend on it. But the emerging methods of hacking reveal the weaknesses of this aging approach. Developers should design apps with security in mind (the source code). This is why static code analysis is important. It helps spot bugs in the application. It also detects code problems in development.
You may have fewer False Positives (FP) as Pentesting simulates real-world attacks performed by security experts against your application. It also can be outsourced according to the conditions of foreign firms.
SAST vs DAST
Static application security testing can be embedded directly within the development environment. This allows developers to track their code continuously. Scrum masters and product owners will also regulate secure coding best practices. This leads to rapid vulnerability reduction and improved code integrity and security.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) focuses on testing the application in run-time, and this is usually done using vulnerability scanners. While SAST focuses on creating and writing secure code, DAST focuses more on finding security flaws in the deployed application.
Overall, both SAST and DAST are of great value to any organization trying to reduce the security risk to their application.