Where this offering fits
Shinobi’s autonomous penetration-testing enquiry requires the same clear authority and scope as other active assessments. Define target ownership, permitted actions and evidence expectations before connecting it to an environment. Marketing claims of broad coverage should not replace a supported, bounded test plan.
Architecture and rollout decisions
Confirm currently supported targets and deployment prerequisites. Agree rules of engagement, exclusions, emergency contacts and stop conditions. Pilot an authorised low-risk scope and review findings with the system owner. Establish how a claimed issue is validated, remediated and retested. Sensitive production or third-party systems require explicit permission rather than inferred reachability.
An evaluation scenario for this offering
Start with a customer-owned laboratory target and a documented known test weakness. Obtain written authorisation for the currently supported assessment type, including excluded assets, timing and stop conditions. Ask the operator to show whether the produced evidence supports the finding and how an uncertain result is reviewed. Apply an authorised correction and use the agreed retest to evaluate closure, preserving cleanup confirmation. Include a scope-boundary review before any expansion. The acceptance outcome should establish a supervised, evidence-based workflow within the confirmed offer, not imply that autonomy removes accountability or permits testing any system the platform can reach.
Evidence to request for this scope
- Retain written authorisation and exclusions.
- Validate evidence and false-positive handling.
- Agree stop, recovery and retest procedures.