Application security testing and API security testing are two important components of a comprehensive cybersecurity strategy as organizations continue to embrace digital transformation. While application security testing (AST) focuses on analyzing application code and configurations to identify potential vulnerabilities, API security testing ensures that APIs are protected from attacks. Both types of testing play a critical role in protecting applications and APIs, and understanding the differences between them is essential for organizations to choose the right approach.
AST, also known as AppSec testing, is a crucial element in any secure application development life cycle. It involves techniques such as code review, penetration testing, static analysis, dynamic analysis, and fuzzing to identify security flaws in an application before it goes live. By regularly conducting application security assessments, organizations can identify potential vulnerabilities and address them proactively.
On the other hand, API security testing focuses on detecting potential issues early to address them before they become major problems. It ensures that APIs are not vulnerable to malicious attacks or unauthorized access. It involves testing for authentication, authorization, data validation, input validation, access control mechanisms, and encryption algorithms. Additionally, API functionality testing is often matched with API security testing to ensure that the API is working as intended.
To choose between application and API security testing, organizations need to consider their ultimate objectives, cost, complexity, scalability, and the availability of necessary resources and expertise. It is important to understand the different types of tests available, such as static code analysis (SAST), dynamic application security testing (DAST), and penetration testing, and their advantages and disadvantages. Regular testing is crucial to quickly and effectively identify vulnerabilities.
However, relying solely on application security testing may not be enough to address API security risks. Some API security risks may not be evident in AST results. For example, a DAST process may reveal a problem with query strings, but the actual risk could be coming from a compromised API run by another entity. Investigating these issues requires time and resources. Similarly, fuzzing attacks, where a malicious actor uses approximations of data required for an API call, may go undetected in AST. Such attacks can put the API and the data it handles at risk of breach.
Moreover, broken object level authorization (BOLA) is a serious vulnerability in API security. Traditional AppSec testing solutions may not pick up BOLA risks because they don’t understand the concept of API endpoints. APIs serve as the connective tissue between distributed parts of an application backend and the front end presented to the consumer. To properly test an API, it is necessary to test the reachability of all the API endpoints. This can be done manually or using an automatic reachability solution.
Noname Security Active Testing is an API security testing solution that fills in the gaps in traditional testing approaches. It provides API security testing functionality and can run over 100 dynamic API security tests on an application. This includes automated testing based on the OWASP API Top 10 vulnerabilities, which include broken object level authorization, excessive data exposure, lack of resources and rate limiting, mass assignment, and security misconfiguration. Noname Security Active Testing relies on business logic instead of fuzzing.
In conclusion, both application security testing and API security testing are crucial for protecting applications and APIs. Understanding the differences between the two and selecting the right approach based on organizational needs and resources is essential. Additionally, using specialized solutions like Noname Security Active Testing can enhance API security testing and mitigate potential risks. By implementing comprehensive security measures, organizations can strengthen their cybersecurity posture and protect against potential cyberattacks.