Penetration Testing Report: Key Information and Deliverables
A well-formed penetration testing report transforms technical testing results into clear guidance that organizations can use to manage risk and strengthen security.
When a penetration testing engagement concludes, the documentation delivered to the client becomes the primary outcome organizations depend on. The report explains how systems responded to real-world attacks executed by ethical hackers, what vulnerabilities were confirmed, and what steps should follow. Its clarity directly affects how quickly remediation occurs and how well a business understands its exposure to cyber threats.
Why does reporting matter in penetration testing? The purpose of the deliverable is to make offensive security work actionable. The value of the test lies not only in the depth of findings, but also in how clearly they’re communicated. A high-value document supports leadership in evaluating risk posture while giving engineering teams the level of detail needed to fix issues correctly.
This balance prevents gaps between business priorities and technical execution, becoming especially relevant in regulated environments such as PCI DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2, HIPAA, and other standards that require periodic evidence of security testing, documented risk treatment, and proof that vulnerabilities were addressed within defined timeframes.
Penetration Testing Reports: Key Deliverables Security and Engineering Teams Rely On
What deliverables matter most in a penetration testing report and how do they support better security decisions?
Technical Report: Verified Findings That Drive Remediation
This document contains the detailed results of the pentesting process. Each confirmed vulnerability appears with a clear description, affected components, exploitation evidence, and recommended remediation. Severity is often aligned with a scoring model such as CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System), allowing teams to plan effort and address the highest-impact issues first.
Business context also shapes risk prioritization. Rather than listing “theoretical” weaknesses, testers assess how a vulnerability could be used in business-specific workflows and what an attacker could actually achieve with it. Clear evidence such as screenshots, request traces, and reproducible steps shows how the issue manifests and how it should be addressed. As a result, remediation efforts stay focused, efficient, and aligned with the real way systems behave under exploitation.
As security programs evolve through recurring assessments, the technical report becomes a reference for progress, patterns, and areas that require continued attention.
Retesting Results
After the delivery of a penetration testing report, remediation efforts can lead to updated deliverables. A retesting spreadsheet is commonly used to exchange information on how fixes were implemented before testers return to validate them. This process ensures transparency and coordination between teams, allowing both sides to track remediation progress clearly.
Once validation is complete, previously identified vulnerabilities must remain documented within the updated deliverable, never removed or excluded. Maintaining that traceability preserves historical context and confirms that the organization’s security posture has genuinely improved.
Executive Summary: A Clear View of Organizational Risk
The executive summary presents what was tested, why it matters, and how the organization stands today. By communicating residual risk in plain language (without losing technical accuracy), leaders can quickly see which vulnerabilities demand action due to operational impact or regulatory pressure, aligning business priorities with the remediation work ahead.
A strong summary helps stakeholders answer essential questions such as whether critical systems are protected, if any confirmed vulnerabilities could affect customers or data integrity, and how these results compare with what the organization expected before testing began.
A concise, business-focused summary ensures leadership knows exactly where to act first, turning offensive testing into measurable security progress.
Attestation Letter: Proof Without Revealing Details
In vendor assessments, procurement processes, or client-driven due diligence, it’s common to prove that cybersecurity testing occurred without exposing sensitive details. An attestation letter provides that confirmation. Signed by the provider, it states what was tested and when, offering assurance while keeping vulnerabilities confidential.
Feedback Form: Input That Strengthens the Process
Some pentesting providers include a structured feedback form at engagement close. Although not part of the security evidence, it supports continuous improvement across future penetration testing deliverables. Insights regarding communication, scoping, or testing focus often shape how effectively both sides collaborate next time.
Why Do Deliverables Influence Long-Term Outcomes?
Reporting is not about archiving vulnerabilities. It’s about informing decisions that make systems more resilient. Many organizations align penetration testing with release schedules and follow up with focused retesting, ensuring that critical fixes are verified.
When deliverables maintain structure and traceability across cycles, each assessment builds on the previous one. With that continuity, pentesting becomes a sustained improvement effort, not a one-time snapshot. Clear documentation enables testers and internal teams to track remediation progress, reduce recurring exposure, and strengthen security posture with every iteration.
Need Expert Penetration Testing?
For organizations seeking comprehensive security testing, with deliverables that truly guide remediation, we collaborate with leading offensive security specialists who combine deep technical expertise with an attacker-led mindset. Their reporting focuses on business-critical vulnerabilities and practical improvement of your security posture.
Our pentesting partners focus on:
Targeted attack scenarios: Business-critical simulations that focus on your most valuable assets and attack surfaces, thinking like real attackers.
Regulatory compliance: Specialized assessments for PCI DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001, and other industry-specific requirements.
Real-world risk prioritization: Manual testing that uncovers exploitable vulnerabilities beyond automated scanning capabilities.
Last updated