Breach Simulation | Breaking Cybersecurity News | The Hacker News

Your pentest report looks clean. That might be the problem. Run automated pentesting long enough, and the new findings start to dry up. By the third or fourth run, fewer issues appear. The report looks stable. Leadership reads "stable" as "secure." It usually isn't. The work slows down. The risk does not. That gap is what a The Hacker News webinar with Picus Security sets out to close. Autumn Stambaugh and Can Yüceel, with host James Azar, show what your tool validates, where it stops, and how to close what it leaves open. Register for the webinar. Start with the core problem. A flat report can mean the obvious holes were fixed. It can also mean the tool has reached the edge of what it can see. Automated pentesting is often treated as full security validation. It is not. Picus frames validation as six surfaces and puts automated pentesting on one of them, the attack path: whether an attacker can move through an environment. That leaves the other five ...

Security doesn’t fail at the point of breach. It fails at the point of impact.  That line set the tone for this year’s Picus Breach and Simulation (BAS) Summit , where researchers, practitioners, and CISOs all echoed the same theme: cyber defense is no longer about prediction. It's about proof. When a new exploit drops, scanners scour the internet in minutes. Once attackers gain a foothold, lateral movement often follows just as fast. If your controls haven’t been tested against the exact techniques in play, you’re not defending, you're hoping things don't go seriously pear-shaped. That’s why pressure builds long before an incident report is written. The same hour an exploit hits Twitter, a boardroom wants answers. As one speaker put it, “You can’t tell the board, ‘I’ll have an answer next week.’ We have hours, not days.” BAS has outgrown its compliance roots and become the daily voltage test of cybersecurity, the current you run through your stack to see what actuall...

In cybersecurity, confidence is a double-edged sword. Organizations often operate under a false sense of security , believing that patched vulnerabilities, up-to-date tools, polished dashboards, and glowing risk scores guarantee safety. The reality is a bit of a different story. In the real world, checking the right boxes doesn’t equal being secure. As Sun Tzu warned, “Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” Two and a half millennia later, the concept still holds: your organization’s cybersecurity defenses must be strategically validated under real-world conditions to ensure your business’s very survival. Today, more than ever, you need Adversarial Exposure Validation (AEV) , the essential strategy that’s still missing from most security frameworks. The Danger of False Confidence Conventional wisdom suggests that if you’ve patched known bugs, deployed a stack of well-regarded security tools, and passed the nec...