From what I understand, Wiz basically finds flaws that allows systems to be compromised, as listed on the "Wiz (company)" Wikipedia page. As more and more AI-generated code is released into the wild, I imagine Wiz is going to have an endless growing supply of clients.
Is there a need for a kind of "Underwriter Labs" organization that would test brands and versions of software and put their "approved for consumption because we think it's exploit-free" label on those products so users could feel like they could trust those products to some degree? (Although I'm not sure you could prevent configuration errors by admins.)
Instead of paying penetration testers, would it be cheaper to pay insurance companies to cover loses that "exploit-free" labeled software failed to prevent?
sema4hacker•4mo ago
Is there a need for a kind of "Underwriter Labs" organization that would test brands and versions of software and put their "approved for consumption because we think it's exploit-free" label on those products so users could feel like they could trust those products to some degree? (Although I'm not sure you could prevent configuration errors by admins.)
Instead of paying penetration testers, would it be cheaper to pay insurance companies to cover loses that "exploit-free" labeled software failed to prevent?