Introduction
In a recent episode of Error Code, cybersecurity veterans Robert Famosi and Andrew Hurrell dove deep into the murky waters of OT security. Their candid discussion at RSAC 2025 peeled back layers of complacency, operational inertia, and the invisible ROI that plagues many OT security initiatives. The takeaway was clear: the threat landscape is evolving, and so must the tools and mindsets we deploy to defend our critical infrastructure.
With Penzzer, these challenges aren't just theoretical. They shape how we built our fuzzing platform to actively support security teams navigating the exact issues Robert and Andrew outlined.
1. The OT Complacency Trap and Invisible ROI
The Problem: As Andrew noted, the absence of major OT attacks is misleading. It breeds complacency, making it difficult to justify security investments to boards and CFOs. The ROI for cybersecurity is often invisible measured in what didn't happen.
How Penzzer Helps: Penzzer turns passive defenses into proactive assurance. By continuously fuzzing OT and embedded systems for real-world vulnerabilities, organizations can show measurable outputs: undiscovered zero-days, proof-of-concept exploits, and coverage maps. This transforms security from a vague insurance analogy into a data-driven, reportable metric ideal for boardrooms that need evidence, not hypotheticals.
2. Supply Chain Uncertainty and Dormant Threats
The Problem: With attackers embedding threats during manufacturing or supply chain stages, OT environments may harbor dormant malware for years. As Andrew observed, this long game strategy is particularly insidious and difficult to detect post deployment.
How Penzzer Helps: Penzzer's capability to fuzz binaries and firmware without needing source code means organizations can test third-party components after delivery. Even if the device wasn't built securely, you can catch latent vulnerabilities before they're activated. This gives organizations an edge against both deliberate supply chain threats and accidental misconfigurations.
3. Human Hesitance and Limited Visibility
The Problem: Companies often resist full transparency during assessments due to fear, bureaucracy, or denial. As Hurrell lamented, teams may not want to "admit the risk," creating blind spots in incident preparedness.
How Penzzer Helps: Penzzer doesn't require privileged access or sensitive internal data to be effective. Its fuzzing engine is designed to work with minimal exposure, reducing the friction in high-compliance or trust-averse environments. It complements human assessments with autonomous, unbiased coverage of potential attack surfaces.
4. IT/OT Crossover and Misconfigurations
The Problem: Many attacks begin in IT systems and pivot into OT environments via unpatched software or network misconfigurations. The convergence of these domains has expanded the attack surface significantly.
How Penzzer Helps: Penzzer supports fuzzing of protocols and interfaces commonly bridging IT and OT like Modbus, OPC UA, and proprietary industrial APIs. This allows security teams to simulate adversarial behavior across boundaries, testing not just components but the interactions between them.
5. Evolving Threats and AI-Enhanced Attacks
The Problem: From well crafted phishing campaigns to generative AI-written malware, threat actors are innovating. Defensive tools must evolve to match this sophistication.
How Penzzer Helps: Penzzer's automated approach scales faster than manual testing or traditional pen tests. As threat actors automate reconnaissance and exploitation, defenders need to automate discovery at the same pace. With a combination fuzzing strategies, Penzzer tests different input values and adapts to maximize crash discovery and coverage, closing the gap on AI powered attackers.
