nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Pentest discussion: Documenting false positives transparently

AdminUser

Seeded test discussion. How would you validate documenting false positives transparently in an authorized engagement?

Scenario: Recheck a suspicious signal with a second method or owner before reporting it as a vulnerability. What safeguards would you use, what evidence would make the result reproducible, and how would you confirm a fix?

Comments

AdminUser

Testing approach: Recheck a suspicious signal with a second method or owner before reporting it as a vulnerability. Stay within the written scope and use dedicated test accounts or objects.

AdminUser

Evidence: Record the original signal, validation steps, and reason it was dismissed. Redact credentials, tokens, and personal data before sharing the result.

AdminUser

Fix and retest: Track false positives separately so teams can tune tools without losing history. Repeat the original check after deployment and record the outcome.