Cyber-attacks are an ongoing threat to organisations, and it is imperative that businesses have effective security solutions in place. The identification of vulnerabilities, risks, and weaknesses within computer and network security systems is essential to help avoid attacks. Two of the major tests or assessments to do this are penetration testing and vulnerability assessments.
In order to understand the differences between penetration testing and vulnerability assessments, it’s a good idea to consider what each option provides. As with many things, they are similar in concept, but intrinsically different, too.
What is Penetration Testing?
Penetration testing, often referred to as pen-testing, is used to identify, test and prioritise vulnerabilities within computer systems and networks.
This is done by carrying out activities in a similar way to a threat actor. Threat actors are sometimes referred to as hackers or cyber-criminals.
Carrying out these activities can easily identify potential issues by detecting and exploiting existing weaknesses within the computer system and network being tested, thus making it easier to implement relevant security upgrades in a targeted manner.
What is a Vulnerability Assessment?
A vulnerability assessment or VA (sometimes known as a vulnerability scan) is a process which also aims to identify potential threats and the risks that they might pose to an organisation.
The assessment is carried out by an automated testing tool, with high-quality scans searching for over 50,000 known vulnerabilities. It scans the system and provides a vulnerability assessment report, which lists the results obtained.
The results will highlight the areas that need addressing, which can be used to implement relevant and targeted security upgrades.
Penetration Testing vs. Vulnerability Assessment
When considering which type of testing is best for your organisation, you may wish to consider the key areas of scope below:
| Area of Scope | Vulnerability Assessment (VA) | Penetration Testing (PT) |
| Process | Identifies and ranks all known flaws in networks and applications by risk level. Produces a report highlighting recommended improvements (e.g., system reconfiguration, patch management). | Simulates a real-world attack to exploit identified vulnerabilities. Assesses the severity of risks and determines the level of access achieved by the simulated attack. A repeat test is usually performed after remediation to verify fixes. |
| Implementation | Often carried out regularly by internal teams using automated tools. Evaluation and identification of threats is sometimes outsourced, as it can be a manual process. | Usually performed by qualified external penetration testers (ethical hackers). It can be carried out internally, but it is less common due to the need for impartiality and specialised skills. |
| Speed | Quick to complete, usually taking a few minutes to hours. | A much longer procedure, likely taking a couple of weeks for the full initial test, plus time for re-testing. |
| Coverage | Focuses on internal systems and identifying vulnerabilities to strengthen internal defense mechanisms. | Focuses on external factors and determining how a system would cope if exposed to unknown threats (infiltration). |
| Results | Identifies known vulnerabilities but cannot identify all business logic errors or environment-specific vulnerabilities due to reliance on automation. | Utilises the skills of experienced security experts to discover loopholes and vulnerabilities that automated tools might miss. Involves a mix of manual effort and some level of automation. |
| Application | Best suited for organisations with insecure networks that want to identify known threats across their entire system. Run regularly with endpoint samples assessed. | Best for organisations with strong security defenses that want to consider unknown threats and test how easily their system could be hacked. Usually performed only on critical infrastructure (e.g., servers, databases, firewalls). |
| Cost | Cheaper to implement regularly due to reliance on automation. | Expensive due to the longer duration and the high cost of skilled, experienced pentesters. |
Combining Vulnerability Assessments and Penetration Testing (VAPT)
Many organisations now consider utilising VAPT as best practice for their IT infrastructure. By combining the two methods, it helps a business in the following ways:
- Full and comprehensive understanding of the company’s IT security position
- Both automated and human checking help avoid anomalies and false positives
- Faster remediation time
- Reduced risk for all IT infrastructure within the organisation
- Patch management processes are streamlined
Why do you need Penetration Testing and Vulnerability Assessments?
Detecting common vulnerabilities will obviously help ensure that your network assets are strengthened against cyberattacks. Many industries or clients will expect a certain level of security, and both these types of testing will ensure that you can be compliant to such security regulations. If you wish to complete the Cyber Essentials Plus accreditation, for example, you will need your systems to be tested.
Business and personal clients are now much more aware of data security and protection, and by demonstrating that your organisation carries out regular vulnerability assessments will give them peace of mind and build trust, as well as adhering to general compliance.
With a complete view of the security risks impacting your business systems, you are in the best position to implement proactive remediation of any vulnerabilities, and by carrying out penetration testing, you will also know that the remedial actions taken won’t be exploited by attackers.
As cyber threats evolve, it is important to consistently review and retest your IT infrastructure to remain ahead of the cyber criminals.
How can Mintivo help?
Mintivo ensures that we fully understand your systems’ weak points so we can fix them. Don’t become a cyber statistic – contact Mintivo to talk about how we can help your business.
