<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NetSPI Blog &#187; CTO&#8217;s Corner</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.netspi.com/blog/category/cto-corner/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog</link>
	<description>Information security consulting</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Manual vs. Automated Testing</title>
		<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2010/01/22/manual-vs-automated-testing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2010/01/22/manual-vs-automated-testing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 00:04:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Seth Peter</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[CTO's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Application Security]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Automated tools]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Manual testing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netspi.com/blog/?p=669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[. . . no single application assessment or code review product could find more than about 35% of the total vulnerabilities GE could find with a manual process. That alone should encourage anyone serious about eradicating vulnerabilities within their applications to step it up a notch!]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2010/01/22/manual-vs-automated-testing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vulnerability Scanning with Multiple Products</title>
		<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/11/02/vulnerability-scanning-with-multiple-products/</link>
		<comments>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/11/02/vulnerability-scanning-with-multiple-products/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Seth Peter</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[CTO's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[comparison of scanning tools]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[use of multiple scanning tools]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[vulnerability assessment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netspi.com/blog/?p=406</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If your security team is a capable one, I encourage you to incorporate both commercial and open source tools, and even consider the introduction of more than one commercial product.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/11/02/vulnerability-scanning-with-multiple-products/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are We Ready for a Security Software Assurance Program?</title>
		<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/10/05/are-we-ready-for-a-security-software-assurance-program/</link>
		<comments>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/10/05/are-we-ready-for-a-security-software-assurance-program/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Seth Peter</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[CTO's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Application Security]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[code reviews]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[SDLC]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[secure application development]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[security software assurance program]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netspi.com/blog/?p=272</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Integrating security checks and balances with your application development processes is certainly uncharted territory for many security professionals. Why is this so?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/10/05/are-we-ready-for-a-security-software-assurance-program/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Social Media and Corporate Guidance</title>
		<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/08/11/social-media-and-corporate-guidance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/08/11/social-media-and-corporate-guidance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Seth Peter</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[CTO's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[LinkedIn]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[security guidance]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Social media]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netspi.com/blog/?p=157</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the common themes I took away from the 2009 Blackhat Briefings was the inherent security risks associated with using social media and networking sites. (These concerns have also received some coverage in trade pubs; see, for example a recent Computerworld article [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/08/11/social-media-and-corporate-guidance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is your Compliance Driven by More Than an Audit?</title>
		<link>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/07/14/is-your-state-of-compliance-driven-by-more-than-an-audit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/07/14/is-your-state-of-compliance-driven-by-more-than-an-audit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Seth Peter</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[CTO's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[data breach]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[PCI audit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://corpweb-dev.netspi.com/blog/?p=102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Preparing for an audit can be one of the best ways to fund and improve your security program, but this “stimulus package” for your compliance effort typically dwindles once an organization completes or passes an audit. I see this happen frequently in recurring or annual audits...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.netspi.com/blog/2009/07/14/is-your-state-of-compliance-driven-by-more-than-an-audit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
