Comparison
Red Team vs penetration test: differences, use cases and decision criteria
By Steven Carrier Updated on
A penetration test looks for as many vulnerabilities as possible within a declared scope, often with the teams’ knowledge. A Red Team exercise pursues a specific objective, covertly, and also tests your ability to detect and respond. The penetration test validates a scope; the Red Team tests your defence in real conditions. They are not competitors, but two complementary engagements. See also our other comparisons .
- Two complementary engagements
- Clear criteria
- Help with choosing
What sets the two engagements apart?
| Criterion | Penetration test (pentest) | Red Team exercise |
|---|---|---|
| Objective | Find as many vulnerabilities as possible | Reach a specific objective defined with you |
| Scope | Declared and delimited | Broad, objective-driven |
| Stealth | Generally known to the teams | Covert: detection is part of the test |
| Defence teams informed | Generally yes | Generally not: only a small control group is informed |
| What is measured | The robustness of a scope | Live defence: detection and response |
| Frequency | Regular, often annual | Occasional, rarer and deeper |
| Typical duration | 1 to 2 weeks on average | 1 to 6 months |
| Deliverable | Prioritised list of vulnerabilities | Narrative of the attack path, detection included |
| Expected maturity | Accessible to any organisation, including one still building up | Assumes detection and response capabilities are already in place |
| Useful frameworks | OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (web applications); TIBER-EU, NIST, ANSSI (the French national cybersecurity agency) | MITRE ATT&CK (attacker tactics and techniques) |
Pentest or Red Team: which should you choose for your situation?
You are putting a new application into production and want to validate its security: that is a penetration test. You want to know whether your SOC would detect a realistic intrusion all the way to a critical asset: that is a Red Team exercise. The first answers “is this scope solid?”, the second “could we really defend ourselves?”.
What does each engagement not do?
A penetration test is a snapshot at a given date: your system changes afterwards. A Red Team exercise is deep but one-off, and it does not cover the whole scope. Neither replaces continuous monitoring of exposure between two campaigns. This is where automated validation, or Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) , comes in, replaying attack scenarios continuously.
Which engagement suits your need?
- You are validating a specific scope (application, infrastructure) → penetration test.
- You want to test your detection and response → Red Team.
- Your maturity is still low → start with a penetration test.
- You are already well equipped and want to put yourself to the test → Red Team.
- You want to monitor exposure between two engagements → Beareye’s continuous validation .
An annual combination that makes sense
Many mature organisations combine regular penetration tests to validate scopes that change, an occasional Red Team exercise to test the defence as a whole, and continuous validation in between. Each engagement sheds light on a different angle, and together they cover both duration and depth.
-
regular penetration tests to validate scopes that change
-
an occasional Red Team exercise to test the defence as a whole
-
continuous validation in between
Human engagements and automated validation: not to be confused
Penetration tests and Red Team exercises are engagements carried out by BEAROPS experts, one-off and in depth. Beareye’s automated Red Team is a platform function that continuously replays attack paths : it does not replace a human engagement, it extends its effect between two campaigns. The two complement each other.
Human engagements
Penetration tests and Red Team exercises
carried out by BEAROPS experts, one-off and in depth
The two complement each other.
Sources and references
- MITRE ATT&CK, MITRE
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide, OWASP Foundation
- Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 (DORA), EUR-Lex
Sources consulted on . Report an error: contact+site@bearops.fr
Frequently asked questions
What is the fundamental difference between a Red Team exercise and a penetration test?
The penetration test looks for as many vulnerabilities as possible within a declared scope. The Red Team exercise pursues a specific objective, covertly, and also measures your detection and response. The first validates a scope; the second tests your defence in real conditions.
Which one should you start with?
If your maturity is still being built, start with penetration tests: they validate your scopes and give you a basis for action. Once you are better equipped, a Red Team exercise puts you to the test realistically. The decision tree on this page helps you decide.
Does a Red Team exercise replace the penetration test?
No. They are two complementary engagements: one validates, the other tests your live defence. Neither replaces continuous monitoring of exposure between two campaigns, which is provided by automated validation.
How does this relate to Beareye’s automated Red Team?
Penetration tests and Red Team exercises are human engagements, one-off and in depth. Beareye’s automated Red Team is a platform function that replays attack paths continuously. It extends the effect of human engagements, without replacing them.
Penetration test or Red Team: what does DORA require?
DORA requires financial entities to have a resilience testing programme (Articles 24 and 25) that includes, in particular, penetration tests and scenario-based tests. Our penetration tests and Red Team exercises fit into your digital operational resilience testing programme under Articles 24 and 25 of DORA. The details are on the DORA testing programme page.
Let’s choose the engagement suited to your need
Describe your context and your maturity. A BEAROPS expert will point you to the most useful engagement, penetration test or Red Team exercise, and how to scope it.