Five Key Difference Between Static Analysis and Dynamic Analysis in Mobile App Penetration Testing

Mobile app penetration testing is a critical process to ensure the security and functionality of mobile applications. Two major methodologies used in this testing process are static analysis and dynamic analysis. Both approaches are essential for identifying vulnerabilities, but they work in different ways. So, what’s the difference between static analysis and dynamic analysis in mobile app penetration testing? Let’s break it down:

BreakDown of Static Analysis VS Dynamic Analysis in Mobile Application Pen Test

Aspect	Static Analysis	Dynamic Analysis
Timing of Analysis	Performed before the app is executed, analyzing source code, binaries, or bytecode without running the app.	Conducted while the app is running to analyze its real-time behavior and identify runtime vulnerabilities.
Scope of Vulnerability Detection	Focuses on identifying vulnerabilities in the internal structure and logic of the code.	Focuses on detecting vulnerabilities that manifest during the app’s execution, such as insecure API calls and memory leaks.
Tools and Techniques	Uses Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools like Fortify, Checkmarx, and SonarQube to analyze the code.	Uses Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools like Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, and Appium to test runtime behavior.
False Positives and False Negatives	Has a higher rate of false positives due to the focus on code-level vulnerabilities, some of which may not be exploitable in real scenarios.	Produces fewer false positives since it tests the app in real-time, but may result in false negatives if certain vulnerabilities don’t appear during testing.
Real-Time Context	No real-time context. The analysis is purely code-based, without considering runtime interactions or network conditions.	Full real-time context is available, allowing testers to see how the app behaves under different conditions, such as network requests and user inputs.
Depth of Analysis	Provides deep insight into the app’s code, detecting potential flaws like hardcoded credentials, logic errors, and poor cryptographic implementations.	Limited in-depth view of the internal code but effective in discovering issues such as insecure data handling and authentication flaws during runtime.
Performance Overhead	Does not require the app to be running, so there’s no performance overhead involved during the analysis.	Can introduce performance overhead as the app is executed and analyzed in real-time, potentially impacting the system’s performance during testing.
Suitability in Development Cycle	Best suited for early stages of the development cycle, where code can be analyzed before the app is deployed.	More useful in later stages of development, or post-deployment, where real-world testing is necessary to identify runtime issues.
Testing Focus	Examines the codebase for security flaws, design weaknesses, and logic errors without considering the app’s interaction with external systems.	Tests how the app interacts with external systems, such as servers, databases, and networks, to uncover issues like improper session handling or insecure API calls.

Difference Between Static Analysis and Dynamic Analysis in Mobile App Penetration Testing

1. Timing of the Analysis

• Static Analysis: This type of analysis is conducted before the app runs. Essentially, it involves examining the source code, binaries, or bytecode without executing the program. You inspect the code for vulnerabilities without seeing how it behaves in a live environment. It’s like checking the blueprint of a building before construction.
• Dynamic Analysis: In contrast, dynamic analysis occurs during the app’s execution. The app is launched, and its behavior in real-time is monitored and analyzed. This method helps to see how the app interacts with its environment, detecting runtime vulnerabilities. Think of it as observing the building in use, checking for leaks or structural issues after it’s built.

Key Points

Static analysis helps in finding issues early in the development process, while dynamic analysis is vital for identifying runtime vulnerabilities that could be missed in code reviews.

Learn more about Mobile application pen test guide

2. Depth of Vulnerability Detection

• Static Analysis: This method offers a comprehensive view of the app’s code, helping detect flaws at the deepest levels, such as hardcoded credentials, insecure cryptographic implementations, and logical errors. It’s like reading through a manual line by line to find hidden errors.
• Dynamic Analysis: While dynamic analysis allows for real-world simulation, it might not uncover deeply embedded vulnerabilities in the source code. Instead, it reveals runtime issues like insecure data transmission, input validation problems, or memory leaks, which static analysis may miss. It’s like testing how the app reacts under different conditions.

3. Tools and Techniques

• Static Analysis: Common tools for static analysis include SAST (Static Application Security Testing) tools such as Fortify and Checkmarx, which scan the app’s source code, binaries, or bytecode for known vulnerabilities without executing it. These tools don’t require the app to be running and work by parsing through the code.
• Dynamic Analysis: For dynamic analysis, DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) tools such as Burp Suite and OWASP ZAP are widely used. These tools assess the app in a live environment, monitoring interactions, inputs, and responses to identify vulnerabilities as they manifest during execution.

Check out more Tools for mobile app pen testing.

4. False Positives and False Negatives

• Static Analysis: One common issue with static analysis is the high number of false positives. Since static analysis relies solely on code inspection, it sometimes flags vulnerabilities that might not be exploitable in a live environment. However, this method minimizes false negatives, ensuring you don’t miss vulnerabilities in the code.
• Dynamic Analysis: Dynamic analysis generally produces fewer false positives because it tests the app in real-time. However, there’s a risk of false negatives, where certain vulnerabilities are missed if they don’t manifest during the specific testing scenarios or conditions.

Key insights

Static analysis is more likely to overwhelm you with potential but irrelevant issues, while dynamic analysis may miss threats if certain conditions are not met during testing.

Also check out Difference between mobile app Pen test and mobile app VAT.

5. Scope and Context of Testing

• Static Analysis: This method focuses on the internal structure of the app. It doesn’t account for real-time behavior or the context in which the app operates. You might identify security flaws in the code but won’t see how these flaws affect the app when it’s interacting with a server or network.
• Dynamic Analysis: Here, the focus is on runtime behavior. You can observe how the app responds to different inputs, network conditions, or simulated attacks. The scope is broader in terms of how the app interacts with its environment, but it might miss internal code vulnerabilities that aren’t exposed during runtime.

Dive deep into the Multiple types of mobile application pen test

---

Pros and Cons of Static Analysis and Dynamic Analysis in Mobile App Penetration Testing

Now that we’ve explored the key differences, let’s break down the pros and cons of each method to better understand their strengths and limitations.

Pros of Static Analysis in Mobile App Pen Test

1. Deep Code Inspection: Static analysis allows for a thorough examination of the app’s code, uncovering deeply rooted vulnerabilities.
2. Early Detection: It can be performed early in the development process, allowing developers to fix issues before the app goes live.
3. Comprehensive View: It offers a holistic view of the app’s security by scanning all possible execution paths and vulnerabilities.

Cons of Static Analysis

1. High False Positives: Static analysis may flag issues that aren’t truly exploitable, which can slow down the remediation process.
2. No Real-Time Context: Since the app isn’t running, it’s impossible to detect how vulnerabilities manifest during execution.
3. Limited to Source Code: It can only analyze what’s in the code; it won’t catch runtime or network vulnerabilities.

Pros of Dynamic Analysis During Mobile App Pen Test

1. Real-World Testing: Dynamic analysis tests how the app behaves in real-time, making it possible to uncover vulnerabilities in live scenarios.
2. Less False Positives: Because dynamic analysis observes real-time interactions, it flags fewer false positives than static analysis.
3. Runtime Vulnerability Detection: It can catch vulnerabilities that manifest only during execution, such as memory leaks, insecure API calls, and network vulnerabilities.

Cons of Dynamic Analysis

1. Surface-Level Testing: Dynamic analysis may miss vulnerabilities buried deep in the code.
2. Limited by Execution Paths: It only tests the execution paths that occur during runtime, meaning some vulnerabilities might go unnoticed if certain parts of the code aren’t executed.
3. Requires More Resources: Since dynamic analysis simulates live conditions, it requires more time and resources than static analysis.

Final Thoughts

In summary, the difference between static analysis and dynamic analysis in mobile app penetration testing lies in the timing of analysis, depth of detection, tools, false positives/negatives, and testing scope.

While static analysis helps you inspect the code in-depth before running the app, dynamic analysis reveals real-time vulnerabilities when the app is live. Both methods have their strengths and weaknesses, but when combined, they provide a powerful and comprehensive approach to mobile app security.

---

Frequently Asked Questions