Re:U.S. has almost 500k job openings in cybersecurity
by extrapickles on Thursday May 20, 2021 @08:09AM
(#27220095)
Our reports always have a section on things we looked at or for. Doing so takes a majority of the time it takes to write the report. Since it adds to the cost, firms that don’t do this can underbid the ones that do.
For slimmed down reports that are published/given to third parties (given to the customer’s customer) it’s extremely important that the scope of the test is detailed in that letter. The charlatan firms will be happy to omit the fact that they only tested the “about us” page while blind-folded.
So if you are reading a “letter of assessment” for something you are thinking of adopting, just look for the scope of the test, and if it sounds reasonable they potentially had a good test. If it’s missing, the test wasn’t worth the electrons in that letter.
It's very hard for customers to differentiate the good and bad companies, without having their own internal expertise, and even then you need to go down the line of getting named testers and speaking to each one.
Another problem is with how many/most pentest companies report, which is by exception. There's no requirement to state all the tests they did, just the results, so it's hard to tell the difference between "we've got a good system and they didn't find much" and "they didn't do good work and missed things"