SQLMap VS ZAP

sqlmap

A few weeks ago, I took a short cyber security course on Udemy. SQL injection was a section of the course. I knew about the concept though, I hadn't tried it. I was planning to make a Restful API server and tried SQL injection using a tool sqlmap, which was introduced in the course. While I could have used existing server code, I decided to build one from scratch. It's been a while since I worked on a Restful API server, and I wanted to refresh my knowledge for learning purposes.

I recommend looking for an alternative or if you must do it this way test it with https://sqlmap.org to make sure you are not vulnerable to the lowest effort attacks.

The DAST checks can be automated up to a certain point, where the code should be able to withstand certain scans and attacks. For eg. SQL Injections can be checked with sqlmap which tests with each and every type of sql injection payload and reports it back to the user.

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sqlmapproject/sqlmap.git sqlmap-dev

Sounds good, why not try making a simple vulnerability scanner for APIs too? Maybe something similar to SQLMap

Its not that much of a tool than wrappers of few awesome tools that most of you probably know and use today - sqlmap, bbot and nikto.

I'm excited to share with you my latest contributions to the GitHub community: a collection of free GitHub Actions designed to streamline and enhance security practices utilizing DAST and OSINT tooling that is widely used - sqlmap, bbot and nikto. There were no GH Actions that I could find, so I made them for my use case, but figured everyone can benefit from those awesome tools.

SQLMap

I use ZAP [1] with the OAST add-on for this at the moment. I admit the UX isn't perfect, but it serves my purpose.

If I also want control over the responses (e.g. return a 401 status code for every fifth request), I have a custom extender script [2] for that.

[1]: https://www.zaproxy.org/

Implement tools like Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP for in-depth security scanning of your APIs.

OWASP ZAP

The use of capital punctuation implies a warning? an alert? Would this same response be warranted for Burp which is also a commercial, closed source product?

If this is an issue for some, then ZAP being open source[1] maybe favourable.

That said, Burp is the defacto tool for a reason - it's best in class. Every pentester I know, including myself, has a paid subscription. The fact that it's closed source hasn't been an issue.

[1] https://github.com/zaproxy/zaproxy

Briefly reviewed your product. Seems like OWASP ZAP is your competition: https://www.zaproxy.org/

It runs entirely in the browser so it uses the browser "native" frameworks.

Dynamic analysis involves testing your application while it's running. Tools like OWASP ZAP and Burp Suite can help identify vulnerabilities like SQL injection or Cross-Site Scripting by sending malicious requests to your application and analyzing the responses.

> Lying is not an embellishment or puffery, it's a lie. Engaging a company for a 3 day pen test that's totally insufficient, that would be an embellishment.

I agree, but if the RFP question was phrased "have you done penetration testing?" then that leaves a lot of room for embellishment. If the question is "do you have SOC2 certification?" and you answer "yes" untruthfully, then that is a lie. If they ask for the SOC2 or pentest report and you give them a falsified document, that's where you're (probably) committing fraud.

> One of the most important part of pen tests is that they are external.

AWS/Google/etc have internal security teams doing their pen tests, so no, this isn't true.

> Just doing your job as an engineer and looking for bugs is not a pen test.

What about an engineer spending an afternoon running ZAP[0]?

> It's like saying, "what is an audit really? We have accountants and they check our books for anomalies."

Yeah, which is why you don't just ask a company "do you keep track of your finances?" if you're investing in them, you request external auditors.

[0] https://www.zaproxy.org/

In addition to manual security reviews, you can also implement DevSecOps practices to automate security checks. For example, you can set up a CI/CD pipeline to run static code analysis tools like CodeQL and automatically run penetration tests using tools like OWASP ZAP.

OWASP ZAP (open source)

I would start by installing Burp Suite or OWASP Zap and seeing what the actual messages look like