Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Because they have access to the source code itself. No need to reverse engineer anything.


That depends on your definition. Many people, myself included, take 'red team' to mean -> attack simulation. If you have access to source, it implies a white box test, which is not an attack simulation but 'ordinary' vulnerability research.

The concrete difference between the two is that vulnerability research is mostly focused on the technical security aspects. Eg. is there a buffer overflow here yes or no? From an efficiency perspective it makes no sense to hide the source code or even credentials from the pentesters performing this research.

An attack simulation is more holistic in nature, the question becomes "can your security team detect when we exploit this buffer overflow?". The blue team and the red team do not share details, and to give the blue team a proper exercise they are often not even informed. To do a proper red team exercise the scope must be very broad. Both technical controls as well as procedural operations are in scope. If you call application/network security research a red team exercise I think you're doing it wrong.

So a red team, in the sense of the word that I specified, does not have access source code, and most definitively sometimes needs to reverse engineer binaries.


Couldn't compilation introduce vulnerabilities that wouldn't be in the source, but could be found by decompilation?


Short answer is yes.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: