Red Team Tool Vetting and Validation

Red teaming comes with specific requirements to maintain operational status. A key responsibility is implementing a process for validating red team software. Teams should vet software based on fundamental checks: static analysis, dynamic analysis, dependency verification, and container security when applicable. Teams should also assess the software’s origin, use case, availability, and reputation. This approach ensures thorough risk scrutiny, enabling leadership to make informed decisions about accepting or denying tools. This validation process is necessary since we'll be using these tools during red team security assessments.

This guide explores the methodologies and frameworks used to validate red team software security, with a particular focus on tool vetting and scoring approaches. You can find a more detailed analysis in the Cyber Red Teaming book.

Use the Excel template in the Resources > Software Testing and Vetting section to enhance your understanding. The spreadsheet includes a helpful cheat sheet in the intro tab that outlines the tools, processes, and outcomes. This will explain which tools to use, which processes to check, and what results to expect. After mastering the template and manual method, consider augmenting the process with automation.

Fundamentals of Software Validation

Software validation represents a structured process that integrates multiple testing methods to evaluate and ensure both the security posture and operational reliability of tools. This method encompasses a series of analyses that delve into various critical dimensions of a software assessment.

• Static Analysis: Examining code without execution to identify potential vulnerabilities and security flaws early in the development cycle.

• Dynamic Analysis: Running software in controlled environments to observe real-time behavior and potential security implications.

• Dependency Verification: Evaluating external components and libraries for vulnerabilities and authenticity.

• Container Security: Ensuring the integrity of container images through comprehensive scanning and signature verification.

Scoring Framework Explained

The scoring system implements another framework for evaluating software security across four critical dimensions, each designed to provide an assessment of potential risks and vulnerabilities. This approach enables red teams to make informed decisions about tool adoption while maintaining robust security standards.

• Origin Assessment (0-100 points): Evaluates the source reliability, repository trustworthiness, and development history.

• Use Case Analysis (0-100 points): Examines the intended purpose and potential security implications.

• Source Code Availability (0-100 points): Assesses transparency and code accessibility.

• Developer Reputation (0-100 points): Considers the track record and credibility of the development team.

Risk Categories and Actions

The scoring framework we’ve established categorizes software tools into three distinct risk categories, each demanding specific validation requirements and organizational responses based on your thorough security assessments:

• High Risk (250-400 points): Requires minimal validation and can proceed with standard testing; minimal risk.

• Medium Risk (160-249 points): Demands additional security validation and documentation plus leadership approval; moderate risk.

• Low Risk (0-159 points): Needs active and static analysis plus leadership approval; severe risk.

Best Practices

To implement this validation framework and ensure robust security measures across your red team’s software ecosystem, consider the following foundational guidelines that will help establish a systematic approach to tool validation:

• Establish dedicated testing environments that incorporate both Windows and Linux capabilities to ensure comprehensive coverage across operating systems, enabling thorough evaluation of tools in their native environments and identification of platform-specific vulnerabilities or behavioral differences.

• To ensure proper validation, verification, and documentation of findings, implement security gates and quality checkpoints between each testing phase before proceeding to subsequent analysis stages.

• Maintain meticulous and standardized documentation that captures all testing procedures, methodologies, results, and observations, including detailed logs of any anomalies or security concerns identified during the validation process.

• Update and refine validation criteria and testing parameters based on emerging threats, industry best practices, and lessons learned from previous assessments to maintain robust security standards.

• Use a combination of automated security tools and thorough manual review processes to ensure coverage and detection of both known vulnerabilities and potential security risks.

Continuous Monitoring and Updates

Software validation should be viewed as an ongoing, iterative process that requires attention and refinement. Organizations should implement a monitoring strategy that encompasses multiple aspects of security and functionality:

• Monitor tool behavior and performance through testing protocols, automated monitoring systems, and periodic manual reviews to ensure consistent operation and identify any anomalies.

• Conduct new security assessments for updates and patches, including thorough regression testing and vulnerability scanning, to validate that modifications haven’t introduced new security risks or operational issues.

• Stay informed about emerging security threats and vulnerabilities through active participation in security communities, subscription to threat intelligence feeds, and regular review of industry security advisories.

• Maintain up-to-date documentation of all validation procedures, including detailed records of testing methodologies, results analysis, and any remediation actions taken to address identified issues.

Review

Through adherence to these guidelines and the implementation of robust validation procedures, red teams can establish a strong security posture that minimizes their exposure to potential security risks and vulnerabilities. This method of software validation, combined with monitoring and regular assessments, enables red teams to maintain a high level of operational effectiveness while ensuring the integrity and security of their tools and systems remains uncompromised.