Writing Pentesting Reports.

The Reporting Phase in Penetration Testing

In a penetration test, the Reporting Phase translates technical findings into actionable insights, providing a roadmap for stakeholders to strengthen security. Let's dive into key components, best practices, and examples to ensure effective and clear reporting.

Key Components of the Reporting Phase

1. Executive Summary
   A strong executive summary offers a high-level view of critical findings, summarizing potential impacts and prioritizing actions. Tailor this to executives and managers by avoiding excessive technical jargon and focusing on business implications.

   1. Primary questions to ask
      1. who was the testing performed by(i.e. testers name, company performing testing)
      2. What was the scope/target[s](e.g. testing was performed on the Prod network of xyz corp., 172.16.54.38-172.16.54.250)
      3. what was found, how many(explain the overall summary of testing: found 3 critical Auth vulnerabilities , 2 high dependencies, and 7 informational findings)

2. Technical Findings and Vulnerability Matrix
   Detailed technical findings and a vulnerability matrix provide a thorough overview of each vulnerability's nature, exploitability, and impact. The matrix simplifies complex technical data into a format that highlights severity and aids in prioritizing responses.

   I  like using a separate spreadsheet to list out all finding and be able to attach to report later.

3. Testing Methodology and Environment
   Clearly describing the methodology and testing environment is essential for report transparency. Include the frameworks (like OWASP or custom PTES-based approaches) and tools used, ensuring readers understand the scope and approach.

   Example: The provided template specifies that testing was aligned with OWASP Top Ten and includes tailored testing methodologies, indicating the environments assessed (e.g., corporate network, internet-based analysis) to guide readers in understanding the context of each vulnerability

   
   

4. Remediation Recommendations
   Clear remediation recommendations empower stakeholders to address vulnerabilities effectively. Each recommendation should be specific, actionable, and prioritized based on severity.

   Note: I had a manager once tell me about the "SMART" method, which means you should make sure every remediation recommendation and ticket  should be "Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Repeatable, and Timely". basically meaning make sure you explain the 'Specific/exact' issue, make sure there's an actual way to resolve the issue, make sure the fix is achievable, make sure someone else can test to prove the issue exists, and make sure the fix can be applied in a reasonable way and time.​

5. Appendices for Additional Context
   Appendices like glossaries, risk classification matrices, and tool lists help bridge knowledge gaps for non-technical stakeholders. Including definitions, technical terms, and risk ratings ensures the report is comprehensible and accessible to all.

Best Practices for the Reporting Phase

• Prioritize Clarity Over Complexity: Avoid jargon when possible, especially in executive summaries. Summarize technical findings in lay terms to ensure all stakeholders understand the report.

• Use Visual Aids for Complex Data: A vulnerability matrix or summary chart simplifies the communication of complex findings. Ensure visual elements are clear and directly support the text.

• Actionable and Specific Remediation Steps: Recommendations should be as specific as possible. Generic advice lacks actionable value, so be sure recommendations are tailored to the specific vulnerabilities discovered.

• Modular Formatting: Modular formatting enhances readability, especially for non-technical audiences. Using distinct sections (Executive Summary, Technical Findings, etc.) helps readers navigate and focus on relevant details without reading the entire report.

Structuring Your Report for Maximum Impact

There are multiple approaches to structuring a report:

• Executive-Centric Approach: Start with executive summaries, impact statements, and prioritized recommendations, followed by technical details for those who need them.
• Technical-First Format: If the primary audience is IT-focused, begin with technical findings and append executive summaries later.
• Mixed-Format for Broad Audiences: Use a mixed format with modular sections, such as summaries upfront and appendices for deeper technical context. This balances readability for both technical and non-technical stakeholders.