Technology is a funny thing. It can create and destroy. The starkest example of this duality is nuclear technology. It was used to annihilate more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nuclear weapons continue to pose a grave threat to mankind. The same technology is also used to generate electricity. A similar situation exists in the cybersecurity sector, where a lot of technology is used to secure systems and compromise them. The first (and the most obvious) candidate is Artificial Intelligence/ Machine Learning (AI/ML), including Agentic AI, which we have discussed here. Let us look at some other dual-use components.
| Tool and purpose | Offensive & Defensive capabilities | Detection & Mitigation |
| Nmap — Network scanner & NSE scripting engine | Defensive: Asset discovery, port/service inventory, baseline drift detection, compliance checks, authenticated validation. Offensive: Wide-scale port/service discovery, OS/service fingerprinting, NSE scripts for probing/exploitation and credential enumeration, reconnaissance for attack planning. | Detection: IDS/IPS alerts for high-rate SYN/ACKs, unusual scan patterns (many ports/IPs), NSE-specific probe signatures, firewall logs showing sequential port probes. Mitigation: Rate-limit/IPS blocking, network segmentation, honeypots, scan whitelists & approved scanner bastions, JIT privileged access for scanning. |
| Shodan — Internet asset indexing/search engine | Defensive: Continuous discovery of exposed devices/services, validate public footprint, alert on accidental exposure. Offensive: Search for Internet-exposed devices with default creds/vulnerable services, find management interfaces and exploitable IoT/OT devices. | Detection: Passive indexing leaves little trace; correlate spikes in follow-up connection attempts after exposure is indexed; watch for unusual access patterns to recently exposed hosts. Mitigation: Remove/public-interface hardening, authentication/VPNs for management interfaces, minimize public footprint, monitor for scanning after indexing. |
| Nessus / OpenVAS — Vulnerability scanners | Defensive: Automated CVE checks, authenticated scanning for accurate risk assessment, compliance reporting, remediation prioritization. Offensive: Automated identification of exploitable CVEs, mass scanning to find low-hanging targets. | Detection: Scanner user-agents/signatures, credential use anomalies, IDS alerts for vulnerability probe patterns. Mitigation: Control scanner credentials (vaulted), run scans from isolated environments, enforce scan schedules/whitelists, accelerate patching and compensating controls. |
| OWASP ZAP — Web app proxy & scanner | Defensive: Dynamic application testing (DAST), fuzzing for XSS/SQLi, developer integration and regression testing. Offensive: Automated web fuzzing, parameter tampering, crafting exploit payloads, discovering business logic flaws. | Detection: Abnormal volumes of fuzzed parameters, repeated parameter permutations, WAF alerts for anomalous payloads. Mitigation: Tuned WAF/rate limiting, input validation/safe coding, restrict automation against production apps, dev/test isolation for aggressive scanning. |
| Wireshark / tcpdump — Packet capture & protocol analysis | Defensive: Incident response, packet-level troubleshooting, protocol debugging, evidence collection. Offensive: Sniffing unencrypted credentials, mapping internal topology, intercepting sensitive traffic (if on-path). | Detection: ARP/MITM anomalies, switch/SPAN misuse, processes enabling promiscuous mode (endpoint monitoring), unexpected mirror sessions. Mitigation: Enforce encryption (TLS/IPsec), control SPAN/mirroring access, port security, NAC, EDR monitoring for capture tools. |
| Mimikatz — Windows credential & ticket tool | Defensive: Red team validation of credential exposure, testing LSA/Kerberos mitigations, validating PAM/credential protections. Offensive: Dump plaintext creds/NTLM hashes, extract Kerberos tickets, perform pass-the-hash, create golden/silver tickets for lateral movement. | Detection: LSASS memory access by non-LSASS processes, Sysmon/EDR alerts for suspicious token/ticket creation, abnormal process parent/child trees. Mitigation: LSA protection / Credential Guard, minimize local admin, PAM/JIT, rotate creds, EDR with LSASS protection and memory-read detection. |
| Cobalt Strike — Red-team C2 & post-exploit framework | Defensive: Realistic adversary emulation for SOC tuning and purple-teaming; testing detection/response. Offensive: C2 beaconing, command execution, lateral movement, payload staging — commonly repurposed by criminal groups. | Detection: Beacon periodicity and jitter patterns, suspicious HTTP/DNS/SMB flows, known payload/loader artifacts, abnormal process behavior. Mitigation: Egress filtering, proxy inspection/TLS interception where lawful, EDR behavioral detections, block known C2 indicators, restrict scripting and admin tooling. |
| Autopsy / Sleuth Kit — Disk & file system forensics | Defensive: Disk imaging, timeline reconstruction, artifact extraction for IR and legal evidence, malware binary analysis. Offensive: Attackers might use forensic tools to analyze compromised systems to remove traces or locate valuable data; tools could aid anti-forensic workflows if misused. | Detection: Suspicious use of forensic imaging/processes on endpoints, log tampering, time modifications; process monitoring can flag forensic tool execution. Mitigation: Immutable remote logging, separation of forensic workstations, strict access & approval for forensic imaging, maintain chain-of-custody procedures. |
QKS Group Principal Analyst Sujit Dubal advises, “Our research on exposure management consistently shows that the real linchpin of proactive security isn’t just having the same tools as the adversary, it’s recognizing the man-in-the-middle role those tools can play. When defenders consciously occupy that middle ground, every offensive technique becomes a defensive sensor, every exploit path a validation path, and every scan an early warning system. The shield becomes the sword only when governance, context, and accountability are missing. Managed well, that duality is what gives defenders the symmetry of capabilities needed to stay ahead.”
Necessary Evil
Cybersecurity is a perpetual race between the bad and good actors. The best defense comes from the capability to match or balance the threats’ complexity and power. This ability is called “symmetry of capabilities.” One way to tilt the balance in anyone’s favor is to incorporate a tool used by the opposition into their strategies. This makes it a necessary evil from the defenders’ point of view. Measures like limited access with restricted privileges, microsegmentation, and encryption by default can allow safe usage of such tools. The addition of credential guarding software such as Windows Credential Guard, LSA Protection, and PAM systems prevents tools like Mimikatz from dumping credentials. On the macro level, spreading awareness, war gaming, and tool segregation are equally important.
In conclusion
In cybersecurity, having the same weapons as your enemy is helpful in planning a proactive defense strategy. However, the tools’ use requires serious oversight when used in an enterprise environment, when one misstep can lead to issues like noncompliance and the resulting penalties, loss of trust, or even criminal liability. The governance strategy should focus on strict focus on the tools’ usage scope, authorization, and accountability. It’s a shield that can quickly turn into a sword quicker than you realize.