How to Build a Continuous Offensive Security Testing Program in 2026
A practical guide to building a continuous offensive security testing (COST) program: scope, cadence, governance, and exploit-validated findings.
Offensive Security
Offensive security resources for security practitioners.
Guides on autonomous pen testing, red teaming, BAS, and COST.
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM): What It Is and How to Implement It in 2026
CTEM has 5 stages: scoping, discovery, prioritization, validation, mobilization. Here is how to build a program that actually validates exploits in 2026.
FireCompass vs XM Cyber vs Picus Security: Choosing the Right Adversarial Exposure Validation Platform in 2026
XM Cyber models internal attack paths. Picus validates security controls. FireCompass pentests your external web apps and APIs with proof of exploit.
AI Agents Are Doing Real Work. Governing Them Is the Unsolved Problem
Insights from a closed-door roundtable on AI agent safety and governance, chaired by Bruce Schneier and hosted by FireCompass founder Bikash Barai. Participant comments are kept anonymous by agreement. The most useful thing about this roundtable was that nobody pretended to have the answer. A room of senior security leaders spent an hour on AI… Read More »AI Agents Are Doing Real Work. Governing Them Is the Unsolved Problem
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS): What It Validates, and How It Differs from CART, AI Pen Testing, and COST
Plenty of organizations end a quarter with a clean Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) dashboard and a real breach in the same window. That is not a contradiction. It is a category being asked to answer a question it was never built to answer. BAS tells you whether your controls catch known attacker techniques. That… Read More »Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS): What It Validates, and How It Differs from CART, AI Pen Testing, and COST
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »