A penetration testing report turns a controlled penetration test into a usable record. It tells you what the tester assessed, which weaknesses were validated and what your team should fix.
For an Australian SMB, the same report may also be requested during a tender, security review, certification assessment or cyber insurance application.
Its value depends on whether the scope, evidence, risk reasoning and retest status can withstand that review.
Before relying on a red-amber-green summary, check whether the report can take a finding all the way from a verified attack path to documented closure.
What is a Penetration Testing Report?
A penetration testing report is the formal output of an authorised attempt to exploit weaknesses within a defined scope. That authorised attempt is offensive security work, where a tester acts against your systems to prove what an attacker could reach.
It records the test conditions, validated findings, supporting evidence, risk interpretation and recommended remediation at a specific point in time.
Used correctly, it provides a scoped view of your cybersecurity posture and a basis for prioritising work.. The view remains limited to the assets, access and testing period recorded in the report.
A penetration test report should explain what the tester manually validated or combined into an exploitable path and what that path could mean for your business.
The report is not a security certificate or a guarantee that no weakness exists. A result with no critical findings means the tester did not identify a critical issue under the agreed scope and test conditions.
What Types of Penetration Testing Reports Are there?
There is no universal set of penetration testing report types, but most engagements use a full technical report, an executive or sanitised summary, and a retest report for different audiences and stages.
| Deliverable | Primary reader | Main purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Full penetration test report | Security leads, IT managers and system owners | Records the scope, method, evidence, findings, risk reasoning and remediation advice |
| Executive or sanitised summary | Directors, procurement teams, clients and insurers | Explains the test coverage, material outcomes and next actions without unnecessary exploit detail |
| Technical findings pack | Engineers, developers and security operations staff | Provides affected assets, evidence, attack conditions and implementation-level remediation detail |
| Retest report | Risk owners, auditors and assurance reviewers | Records whether original findings were fixed, partly fixed or remain exploitable |
These report types give technical teams, decision-makers and assurance reviewers different views of the same engagement.
Where a tender, client or insurer only needs confirmation that testing occurred, your provider may also issue an attestation letter.
An attestation letter records the agreed scope and test period, but it is supporting evidence rather than a substitute for the full report.
What Does a Penetration Testing Report Include?
A penetration testing report should show the test outcome, testing context, validated evidence, risk priorities and path to closure.
The structure below draws on common report contents in the PCI Security Standards Council’s Penetration Testing Guidance v1.1, but groups them into a practical sequence for readers.
We combine related content such as scope and methodology, give risk and remediation their own sections, and use appendices for supporting detail.
Executive Summary
The executive summary explains the test outcome in terms a decision-maker can use, which should:
- Identify what was tested and when
- State the material outcomes
- Describe credible business impacts
- Name the actions that need leadership support.
A strong summary also discloses major exclusions or testing limits. It does not rely on a finding count as its conclusion.
One attack path formed by several medium-rated weaknesses can demand more attention than an isolated high-rated issue on a low-value system.
Scope and Methodology
The scope and methodology define where the report’s conclusions apply and how the tester reached them.
The methodology should state the testing perspective and coverage. This may include internal penetration testing or external penetration testing and authenticated or unauthenticated access.
Coverage can span network infrastructure and cloud components. It can also cover web applications, APIs or mobile apps.
The report should explain the main testing phases and recognised approaches without turning the report into a raw tool log.
Before interpreting the result, we recommend reviewing the scope and methodology closely. Together, they define what testing was performed and what the result can support.
A report that excludes an application’s authenticated functions cannot support a conclusion about the security of those functions.
Findings and Evidence
Each finding should show the validated weakness, affected target, attack conditions, business impact and recommended fix.
Supporting evidence should prove the conclusion without exposing unnecessary sensitive information.
To keep each finding traceable from discovery through remediation and retesting, the report should record the following fields:
| Finding field | What a useful entry shows |
|---|---|
| Finding ID and title | A stable reference that remains consistent through remediation and retesting |
| Affected target | The exact asset, endpoint, application function, account role or network segment involved |
| Description and root cause | The weakness and the condition that allowed it to exist |
| Attack path and prerequisites | How exploitation was validated and what access or conditions an attacker would need |
| Evidence | Redacted requests, responses, screenshots, logs or tester observations that support the conclusion |
| Technical and business impact | What an attacker could technically achieve and what that could affect in your operations |
| Remediation recommendation | A specific correction or control change that addresses the cause rather than the visible symptom |
| References | Relevant CVE, CWE, vendor advisory or technical reference where one applies |
Reporting tools can organise screenshots, affected targets and finding IDs. They do not replace the tester’s reasoning, manual validation or explanation of business impact. Automated output on its own belongs to a vulnerability assessment, which lists known weaknesses without proving any of them can be exploited.
Risk Ratings and Prioritisation
Risk ratings show how serious a weakness is from a technical perspective, while prioritisation determines which finding your team should address first.
To turn that rating into a practical remediation order, we recommend checking how the weakness interacts with your systems, data and existing controls. Give a finding higher priority when it:
- Is exposed to the internet or achievable with limited access.
- Could lead to privileged access, a data breach involving sensitive customer or staff information, or disruption to important systems.
- Can be combined with another weakness to create a wider attack path, which is how a real cyber attack moves from a minor foothold to a serious loss.
- Is not adequately reduced by an existing security control.
Record why a finding received its priority alongside the result. This gives technical teams and business owners a shared basis to assign and track the fix.
Remediation and Retesting Plan
The remediation and retesting plan turns each finding into work and defines how closure will be proven.
The report should identify the affected assets, recommended correction and retest criteria.
Your action plan should then add the responsible owner, target date, dependencies and any temporary control needed while the permanent fix is prepared.
Retesting should reference the original finding ID and record the test date, method, evidence and outcome.
Practical status labels include closed, partly remediated, still exploitable and unable to retest. The original finding should remain visible so a reviewer can trace the exposure from discovery to closure.
Risk acceptance is a separate management decision. If your business defers a fix, document the reason, approving risk owner, interim control and expiry or review date.
The penetration tester can explain residual exposure but cannot accept that risk for you.
Appendices
Appendices hold supporting detail that improves traceability without crowding the main report. They may include the target inventory, full CVSS vectors and technical references.
Testing roles, tools, a glossary, clean-up confirmation and evidence-handling notes may also sit here.
Keep appendices proportionate to the audience. Do not include live credentials, session tokens, unnecessary personal information or full data extracts.
Sensitive raw evidence can be retained separately under the engagement’s agreed access and destruction rules.
How do You Read a Penetration Testing Report?
You can read a penetration testing report by checking each conclusion against its scope, evidence and current status.
To check each conclusion properly, start with the context that limits it, then follow the evidence behind it and finally confirm its current status. Consider to use the following sequence:
- Verify the document: Check the report version, test dates and issue date. Confirm the author, intended audience and confidentiality marking so you know which assessment and distribution copy you hold.
- Read the scope and limitations: Confirm that your important systems, interfaces and user roles were included, then note any time, access or safety restriction that reduced coverage.
- Use the executive summary for the overall result: Identify the material attack paths, affected business services and decisions that require leadership support.
- Trace priority findings to evidence: Follow each claim from the affected asset through the exploit conditions and proof to the stated impact.
- Challenge the priority: Check whether the rating method reflects exposure, asset value, existing controls and the possibility of chaining findings.
- Separate advice from closure: A remediation recommendation says what should change. Only suitable validation or retesting shows whether the weakness is no longer exploitable.
- Match the report to the evidence request: Check the dates, scope and methodology against the exact tender, assessor or insurer question. Confirm any tester independence and retest evidence it requests.
Once you have worked through these checks, the report should give each reader the information needed to make the decision that sits with their role.
| Reader | Main question to answer |
|---|---|
| Directors and business owners | What material exposure was demonstrated, what decision is required and what risk remains? |
| IT and security teams | Which systems are affected, what caused the weakness and how will the fix be validated? |
| Developers and system specialists | What conditions reproduce the issue and which code, configuration or design change removes it? |
| Procurement, assurance and insurance reviewers | Was the right scope tested by a suitable party, and is there traceable evidence of remediation and retesting? |
If the report does not let a reader answer the relevant question, ask the tester for clarification before treating the finding as closed or submitting the document as evidence.
How do You Turn a Penetration Testing Report into an Action Plan?
You can turn the penetration testing report into an action plan by converting every accepted finding into an owned, dated and testable task.
We recommend turning each accepted finding into a repeatable sequence before recording it in a tracker. Work through the following steps, then capture the outcome in the action-plan table below.:
- Validate and group the findings: Confirm affected assets, remove duplicates and group issues that share one root cause or attack path.
- Set the treatment priority: Address demonstrated paths to sensitive data, privileged access or important operations before isolated issues with lower practical exposure.
- Name two forms of ownership: Assign a technical owner to deliver the change and a business risk owner to approve timing, resources or any exception.
- Define the treatment: Record the permanent fix, interim control, dependencies, target date and acceptance criteria for each task.
- Manage the change: Test the correction through your normal change process and preserve implementation evidence without marking the security finding closed.
- Retest the finding: Ask the tester to verify the original attack path and record the result against the same finding ID.
- Feed recurring causes back into controls: Use repeated weaknesses to improve patching, secure configuration, access management, development standards or monitoring.
Once your team has completed these steps, record the resulting decisions in a shared action plan that links each finding to its owner, treatment, due date and retest status:
| Finding ID | Business consequence | Technical owner | Risk owner | Treatment and interim control | Due date | Retest status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT-07 | Unauthorised access to an internet-facing administration function | Platform lead | Service owner | Enforce MFA and restrict access; use an approved IP allowlist until deployment | Agreed date | Scheduled |
Keep evidence of risk decisions as well as technical changes. Our recommendations, you can use a security assessment report to inform remediation and a plan of action and milestones.
Your tracker can perform that job when it preserves the link between the original finding, treatment and validation result.
What do Compliance and Cyber Insurance Expect from a Penetration Testing Report?
Cybersecurity compliance and cyber insurance reviewers expect evidence that answers their specific requirement, which means they do not work from one universal penetration testing report format.
We recommend agreeing with the reviewer, test scope, evidence type and retest expectation before testing starts.
For PCI DSS-related testing, the PCI Security Standards Council’s Penetration Testing Guidance v1.1 provides a useful suggested outline for documenting the test. It supports the evidence review, but does not replace the specific requirements of an assessor, client or insurer.
Which frameworks and requirements call for a report?
Each driver uses a penetration testing report differently. The table below shows the evidence your team should prepare for common compliance, tender and insurance requests.
| Driver | What the reviewer needs to see | Evidence to retain |
|---|---|---|
| PCI DSS | That applicable systems were tested under a defined method and exploitable findings were addressed | Full report, test scope, remediation record and retest result |
| Essential Eight | That specific controls are working as intended; one penetration test alone does not prove an overall maturity level | Relevant findings, control evidence, remediation record and retest result |
| SMB1001 | Evidence that matches your target certification tier and assessment scope | Report, agreed test scope and any required remediation evidence |
| Tender or client assurance | That appropriate systems were tested within a stated period and material issues were addressed | Sanitised summary or attestation where accepted, plus the full report under confidentiality terms if required |
| Cyber insurance | Accurate answers to the insurer’s security questions and supporting evidence where requested | Report, current remediation status and retest result |
Keep the original report, remediation record and retest result together. A penetration test can support a compliance review or insurance application, but it does not guarantee certification, coverage or claim acceptance.
The SMB1001 tier you are certifying to also changes what an assessor accepts, since bronze, silver and gold set different control expectations.
How do You Keep a Penetration Testing Report Confidential?
You should keep a penetration testing report confidential by treating the full report as restricted security information.
Our recommendation is to share only the version, and the level of detail, that each authorised reader genuinely needs.
To apply that principle, control where the report is stored, who receives it and how much sensitive detail each version includes:
- Store the full report in an access‑controlled location and limit access to approved roles.
- Use a sanitised summary or attestation for clients, tender reviewers and insurers where that meets their request.
- Remove credentials and sensitive data such as passwords, tokens, personal information and unnecessary exploit details before external sharing.
- Record distribution by noting who receives each copy and removing access once their review is complete.
- Agree retention and destruction arrangements before the engagement begins.
Treat the report the way your data loss prevention controls treat customer records, because it names exactly where your weaknesses sit.
Get a Penetration Testing Report You Can Act on With Redscale
Getting a penetration test is straightforward. Getting a report that fits how your team makes decisions is harder.
If the scope, evidence and remediation priorities do not match your systems and obligations, the report will not move work forward.
Your team then has to interpret technical detail, rebuild priorities and explain the result to decision-makers.
Under tender, insurance or assurance deadlines, that extra translation can delay a fix or leave evidence incomplete.
That is where Redscale’s penetration testing work begins: with the decisions your team must make after delivery.
Redscale’s penetration testing service team will help you validate exploitable weaknesses within an agreed scope.
Then, we give technical and business owners evidence that connects each finding to a priority, remediation decision and retest path.
Book a free discussion with the Redscale team to define the testing scope and report outcome your team needs.
