Comparison

SecPortal vs Escape
AI offensive security platform vs delivery workspace

Escape is an AI-powered offensive security platform that combines Attack Surface Management (continuous real-time discovery of the API, web application, and infrastructure footprint), Business-Logic-Aware DAST (workflow-driven dynamic testing that walks multi-step authorisation chains, access controls, and business flows rather than firing payload-only checks), and AI Pentesting (automated vulnerability validation that drafts proof-of-exploit chains and per-framework AI-assisted remediation snippets for stacks such as React, Django, and Spring Boot). The platform is delivered as cloud-based SaaS with API, CLI, and MCP server integrations through a demo-led commercial path. The buyer is typically an AppSec leader, a product security leader, or an internal security team with a live API and application estate. SecPortal is a different shape: scoped engagements, scanning, manual finding entry, AI report generation, branded client portal, and the engagement record live inside one workspace. This page is the side-by-side for buyers comparing a continuous AI-powered offensive security platform to a delivery workspace that scans, reports, and delivers on its own.

Get Started Free

No credit card required. Free plan available forever.

Feature	SecPortal	Escape
Primary use case	Security delivery workspace with scanning, findings, AI reports, branded client portal, and engagement record on one tenant	AI-powered offensive security platform combining Attack Surface Management, Business-Logic-Aware DAST, AI Pentesting, and AI-assisted remediation across a continuous testing programme
Engagement model with scope, ROE, and deliverables		Continuous discovery and validation programme against the discovered asset estate rather than scoped engagement with a kickoff and a deliverable
Client model with onboarding, contacts, and access control		Internal user roles inside the Escape console; no external client onboarding model
Branded white-label client portal on a tenant subdomain
Built-in external vulnerability scanning (16 modules: SSL, headers, DNS, ports, subdomains, technology fingerprinting, CVE correlation)
Authenticated web application scanning (DAST, 17 modules)		Business-Logic-Aware DAST module runs authenticated workflow-driven testing across the discovered API and web surface
Code scanning (SAST and SCA via Semgrep)
Subdomain enumeration and external attack surface discovery		Attack Surface Management module continuously catalogues the API, web application, and infrastructure footprint in real time
Business-logic-aware DAST that walks multi-step authorisation and workflow chains		Core mechanic; the Business-Logic-Aware DAST module focuses on authorisation chains, access-control matrices, and multi-step workflows rather than payload-only checks
AI Pentesting with automated proof-of-exploit chain reasoning		Core mechanic; the AI Pentesting module drafts attack-chain reasoning and proof-of-exploitability against validated findings
AI-assisted remediation snippets tailored to specific frameworks (React, Django, Spring Boot)	Claude-drafted executive, technical, and remediation report sections from the live findings record	Core mechanic; AI-assisted remediation generates per-framework code snippets aligned to the stack
Manual finding entry with full editor		Findings originate from Attack Surface Management discovery, Business-Logic-Aware DAST scans, and AI Pentesting validation rather than from operator-authored manual entry inside the workspace
AI-powered narrative report generation (executive, technical, remediation)		Console dashboards across discovered assets, business-logic DAST findings, AI Pentesting validation chains, and compliance reporting rather than engagement-shaped executive, technical, and remediation deliverables
300+ finding templates with remediation guidance		Vendor-curated vulnerability records with AI-assisted per-framework remediation guidance
CVSS 3.1 vector parsing and auto-scoring		Severity normalised through the Escape detection model with AI-validated exploitability context
Scanner result import (Nessus, Burp Suite, CSV)		Escape-native discovery and AI validation are the primary intake paths rather than third-party scanner ingestion
Encrypted credential vault for authenticated scans (AES-256-GCM)		Credentials and tokens managed inside the Business-Logic-Aware DAST configuration for authenticated workflow scans
IDE assistant integrations (Cursor, Claude Code, Gemini)		Native integrations with AI IDEs are part of the AI-assisted remediation workflow
Third-party risk platform integration with Wiz		Integration with the Wiz cloud risk platform is part of the offensive security narrative
MCP server integration		MCP server integration is part of the platform delivery surface
Retest workflow paired to original finding		Closure validation runs through the next AI validation cycle or the next discovery sweep rather than a tester-driven retest paired to the original record
Exception register with eight-field decision chain		Per-finding accept-and-suppress workflow scoped to the validated finding rather than an engagement-shaped per-finding decision chain
Compliance framework templates	21 frameworks including OWASP, OWASP ASVS, OWASP MASVS, OWASP API Security Top 10, ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, FedRAMP, MITRE ATT&CK, DORA, NIS2, CIS Controls, and Essential Eight	Compliance reporting across PCI-DSS, HIPAA, SOC 2, ISO 27001, and additional regimes derived from the validated finding feed against the discovered estate
Continuous scheduled scanning cadence (daily, weekly, biweekly, monthly)		Continuous discovery and validation against the discovered estate is the platform default rather than a configurable schedule
Scan-to-scan diff and change-event generation across scheduled runs		Trend, drift, and validation-state views derived from the AI offensive testing feed
Integrated invoicing and Stripe Connect payments for engagements
Activity audit trail with CSV export		Platform audit logs inside the Escape tenant
MFA enforcement on every workspace		SSO and IdP-driven controls inside the customer tenant
Free plan available		Demo-led commercial pricing rather than a published free tier
Pricing model	Free, Pro, Team	Sales-led with annual commitment, named-account onboarding, and platform configuration across the Attack Surface Management, Business-Logic-Aware DAST, AI Pentesting, and AI-assisted remediation module set
Setup time	2 minutes	Named account onboarding, asset discovery baseline, Business-Logic-Aware DAST tuning, AI Pentesting calibration, and integration configuration over a multi-week ramp
Best fit for	AppSec teams, internal security teams, vulnerability management teams, product security teams, pentest firms, MSSPs, and consultancies that want scanning, findings, AI reports, branded portal, and the engagement record on one workspace	AppSec leaders, product security leaders, and internal security teams with a live API and application estate that want a vendor-managed continuous AI-powered offensive testing programme combining ASM, business-logic DAST, AI validation, and AI-assisted remediation

SecPortal vs Escape: AI offensive security platform vs delivery workspace

Escape is an AI-powered offensive security platform. The product combines Attack Surface Management (continuous real-time discovery of the API, web application, and infrastructure footprint), Business-Logic-Aware DAST (workflow-driven dynamic testing that walks multi-step authorisation chains, access controls, and business flows rather than firing generic payloads), and AI Pentesting (automated vulnerability validation that drafts proof-of-exploit chains and per-framework remediation snippets for stacks such as React, Django, and Spring Boot). The platform is delivered as cloud-based SaaS with API, CLI, and MCP server integrations, and the commercial path is demo-led. The buyer is typically an AppSec leader, a product security leader, or an internal security team at a company with a live API and application estate.

SecPortal is a different shape. SecPortal is the security delivery and findings workspace for AppSec teams, product security teams, vulnerability management teams, internal security teams, penetration testing firms, MSSPs, and consultancies that run scoped engagements and ship findings to application owners, business unit stakeholders, auditors, or external clients. The engagement, the scoping, the manual and scanner findings, the AI-drafted report, the branded client portal, the retest, and the invoice all sit inside one workspace. If the buying question is whether to license a continuous AI-powered offensive security platform or run a delivery workspace that holds scoped engagements and ships deliverables, this page is the side-by-side.

Where the AI offensive security model stops for delivery work

These are not Escape-specific criticisms; they are properties of a continuous AI-powered offensive security platform when the buyer compares it to a delivery workspace that holds scoped engagements, ships engagement-shaped reports, and runs under the security team brand.

Built around AI-powered offensive security on a live API estate, not a scoped delivery workspace

Escape is an AI-powered offensive security platform that combines Attack Surface Management (real-time discovery of the API, web application, and infrastructure footprint), Business-Logic-Aware DAST (workflow-driven dynamic testing focused on multi-step processes, access controls, and authorisation chains rather than payload-only scanning), and AI Pentesting (automated vulnerability validation that drafts proof-of-exploit chains and per-framework remediation snippets for stacks such as React, Django, and Spring Boot). The buyer assumption is an AppSec leader, a product security leader, or an internal security team with a live API and application estate that wants a vendor-managed continuous discovery and validation programme accelerated by AI. SecPortal is a different shape: a security delivery and remediation workspace that runs its own external, authenticated, and code scanning, holds the engagement record (scope, kickoff, deliverable, retest, closure), accepts manual finding entry from the workspace team, drafts the AI report from the findings, and ships the deliverable through a branded portal on a tenant subdomain.

No engagement-shaped scope, deliverable, or closure record

Escape is organised around the discovered asset estate, the business-logic DAST scan run, the AI Pentesting validation chain, and the per-finding remediation guidance routed back to the engineering owner. There is no concept of a scoped engagement that opens with a kickoff, runs against a defined target list and timebox, ships a signed-off final report under a stakeholder name, schedules a tester-driven retest paired to an original finding, and closes with an invoice. Teams that need to deliver a scoped pentest, a one-off vulnerability assessment, an AppSec review, an API security review, or a compliance-driven engagement on top of continuous AI offensive testing have to model that lifecycle outside the Escape console.

No branded client portal on your own subdomain

Escape findings, attack surface discoveries, business-logic DAST results, AI Pentesting validation chains, and AI-drafted remediation snippets are reviewed inside the Escape console. The console serves the internal security team and the engineering team that owns the application. There is no white-label tenant subdomain a security team can hand to an external client, an application owner, a business unit stakeholder, a regulator, or an auditor under their own brand. SecPortal serves a branded client portal on the tenant subdomain so every finding, retest, remediation thread, and report download lives under your name rather than under a vendor name. That matters whenever the security testing output goes to a recipient who is reading a deliverable, not operating an offensive security platform.

No engagement-shaped AI narrative reports

Escape drafts AI-assisted remediation guidance (per-framework code snippets for stacks such as React, Django, and Spring Boot) and surfaces console dashboards across the discovered asset estate, business-logic DAST findings, AI Pentesting validation chains, and compliance reporting against the supported framework set. It does not draft engagement-shaped executive summaries, narrative technical writeups, or remediation roadmaps from a scoped finding set under an arbitrary brand. SecPortal uses Claude to draft executive, technical, and remediation deliverables from the live engagement findings, including CVSS vectors, evidence, severity, asset context, and proof-of-exploit details, so the team edits a draft rather than starting from a blank page.

No external perimeter scanning across SSL, headers, DNS, ports, and CVE correlation as native modules

Escape focuses on the API, web application, and AI-driven offensive testing surface. The Attack Surface Management module catalogues the public-facing API, application, and infrastructure footprint, and the Business-Logic-Aware DAST module runs against the discovered estate. It does not run a dedicated external attack surface workflow with SSL and TLS configuration analysis, security header audit, DNS posture, exposed port enumeration, subdomain discovery, technology fingerprinting, and CVE correlation as separate modules wired into one engagement record. SecPortal runs 16 external modules covering those surfaces alongside its 17-module authenticated DAST and code scanning so the surface, the application, and the source live on the same engagement.

Sales-led pricing without a published free plan

Escape pricing is sales-led with a demo-led commercial path. Annual commitment, named-account onboarding, and platform configuration through the cloud-based SaaS plus CLI and MCP server integrations are standard. SecPortal pricing is published on the website with a free plan, monthly Pro and Team tiers, and no annual contract floor for the Pro and Team tiers; new workspaces can sign up and run a scan inside two minutes.

AI offensive security vs delivery workspace as buyer shapes

The honest framing is that the two models solve adjacent problems for different buyer shapes. Saying one is universally better than the other misses the underlying buying decision the security team is making.

An AI-powered offensive security platform is built around continuous discovery, business-logic DAST, and AI validation

Escape and adjacent AI-driven security testing platforms start from the assumption that the buyer has a live API and application estate, wants the platform to continuously discover the surface, wants business-logic-aware DAST to walk multi-step authorisation and workflow chains rather than firing generic payloads, and wants AI to validate findings, draft exploit chains, and suggest per-framework remediation. The economic value is consolidating discovery, business-logic testing, AI validation, and remediation acceleration into one continuous programme that compresses the time from new endpoint to validated finding to suggested fix.

A delivery workspace is built around the engagement record and the deliverable

SecPortal does not assume that continuous AI-driven offensive testing is the right shape for every security testing programme. The workspace runs its own external, authenticated, and code scanning, holds the finding record, supports manual entry from a tester or reviewer, calibrates severity through CVSS 3.1 with environmental adjustment, drafts the AI report, and ships the deliverable through a branded portal on a tenant subdomain. The same record holds for a scoped pentest, a continuous vulnerability assessment, an AppSec code review, a cloud security assessment, an API security review, and a compliance-driven engagement. The finding lives where the work is delivered, not in a continuous validation feed that ends at the platform boundary.

The right answer depends on whether the buyer is accelerating offensive testing or shipping deliverables

If the internal security, AppSec, or product security team has a live API and application estate, an existing engineering team that ships through CI, and a budget shape that fits a sales-led AI-powered offensive security platform priced on the asset surface and the validation tier, Escape is the right shape. If the team is shipping engagement deliverables to application owners, external clients, business unit stakeholders, regulators, or auditors and the buyer wants the scanner, the manual finding entry, the AI report, the branded portal, the invoice, and the retest on one workspace without buying a continuous AI offensive testing programme, a delivery workspace like SecPortal is the right shape. Both can be true: many enterprise teams run an AI offensive security platform for continuous validation and a delivery workspace for scoped engagement output side by side.

Who each platform is the right fit for

Buyer fit is the operating question, not feature parity. The right platform depends on whether the security team is paying for continuous AI offensive testing on a live API and application estate or shipping engagement deliverables on a delivery workspace.

Escape fits AppSec and product security teams investing in AI-accelerated continuous testing

If you are an AppSec leader, a product security leader, or an internal security team, the surface is a live API and application estate, the engineering team already ships through CI, and the budget fits a continuous AI-powered offensive testing programme priced on the discovered estate and the validation tier, Escape was built for that shape. The buyer is paying for the combination of continuous discovery across the API and web surface, business-logic DAST that walks multi-step authorisation and workflow chains, AI Pentesting that validates findings and drafts exploit reasoning, and AI-assisted remediation that produces per-framework code snippets aligned to the stack.

SecPortal fits teams shipping engagement deliverables on a delivery workspace

If you are an AppSec team, a product security team, a vulnerability management team, an internal security team, a penetration testing firm, an MSSP, or a consultancy that wants the scanner, the engagement record, the manual finding entry, the AI report, the branded portal, the invoice, and the retest all on one tenant, SecPortal carries that lifecycle without forcing the team to license a continuous AI offensive testing programme before the first deliverable lands. The same workspace serves an internal team shipping reports to application owners and a firm shipping reports to external clients.

SecPortal fits buyers who want the deliverable, the brand, and the engagement record on one workspace

If the security testing output is read by an application owner, a business unit stakeholder, an auditor, a regulator, or an external client, and every finding, retest, remediation thread, and report download has to live under your brand rather than under a vendor brand, SecPortal is the workspace that holds the record. Findings can still be imported from Nessus, Burp Suite, or CSV when an AI offensive security platform such as Escape sits next to SecPortal as the continuous validation layer. The same record holds for an internal team that wants the deliverable shape (executive summary, technical writeup, remediation roadmap, retest closure pack) without running continuous AI offensive testing from inside the same console.

Pricing comparison

SecPortal publishes pricing on the website. Escape pricing is sales-led with a demo-led commercial path; the public website does not list a published self-serve tier. The tiers below are illustrative of the buying shape rather than a direct per-feature equivalence.

SecPortal Free

Free forever

1 user, 3 clients, 2 engagements per client, 3 AI credits, 6 core scan modules.

SecPortal Pro

$149 per month

Unlimited clients and engagements, AI reports, full external scanner suite, authenticated scanning, code scanning, retesting workflow, and branded client portal.

SecPortal Team

$299 per month

Everything in Pro plus team management, RBAC, invoicing, continuous monitoring schedules, scan diff, and additional AI credits.

Escape

Sales-led pricing

Demo-led commercial path with annual commitment, named-account onboarding, and platform configuration across Attack Surface Management, Business-Logic-Aware DAST, AI Pentesting, AI-assisted remediation, and the compliance reporting module set.

Why teams pick SecPortal alongside or instead of Escape

Move from a sales-led continuous AI offensive testing programme to a workspace that holds engagements, findings, AI reports, retests, exceptions, and a branded portal on one record
Generate executive summaries, technical writeups, and remediation roadmaps from engagement findings rather than exporting AI Pentesting validation chains into a separate reporting tool
Hand application owners, external clients, regulators, or auditors a branded portal on your subdomain instead of access to a vendor-operated offensive security console
Bring external scanning (SSL, headers, DNS, ports, subdomains, technology fingerprinting, CVE correlation) into the same workspace as authenticated DAST, code scanning, and the engagement record instead of pairing AI offensive testing with separate scanners and a separate reporting layer
Capture manual API findings (broken object-level authorisation walkthroughs, mass-assignment proofs, business-logic chains, hardcoded credential traces, design-level weaknesses) alongside scanner output rather than translating them into an AI validation rule
Pair every retest to the original finding so the closure record holds up under audit rather than relying on the next AI validation cycle to confirm the fix
Track exceptions on an eight-field decision chain (rationale, approver, owner, scope, compensating control, evidence, expiry, review cadence) on the same engagement record as the open finding population
Map findings across 21 frameworks including OWASP Top 10, OWASP ASVS, OWASP MASVS, OWASP API Security Top 10, ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, NIST 800-53, NIST CSF 2.0, NIST 800-171, FedRAMP, MITRE ATT&CK, DORA, NIS2, CIS Controls, and Essential Eight from one workspace
Bill the engagement from the same platform with Stripe Connect rather than handling AI offensive testing licensing in a separate procurement cycle
Start on a free plan and pay for the seats and storage you actually use rather than committing to a sales-led annual offensive security programme
Run SecPortal alongside Escape when an AI-powered continuous offensive testing programme sits next to scoped engagement delivery to application owners, auditors, or external clients

How SecPortal scanning compares to the Escape model

SecPortal scanning is operator-driven across external, authenticated, and code surfaces. The same workspace runs the external perimeter scan, the authenticated DAST scan against verified domains, and the SAST plus dependency analysis scan against a connected source repository, then surfaces the findings on the engagement record the operator owns. Escape runs a continuous Attack Surface Management layer that discovers the API, web, and infrastructure footprint, layers Business-Logic-Aware DAST that walks multi-step authorisation and workflow chains rather than firing payload-only checks, and adds AI Pentesting that automates validation and drafts proof-of-exploit reasoning. The trade is continuous AI-driven offensive validation bundled into the contract against operator control of the testing surface and the engagement-shaped deliverable.

The external scanning feature runs 16 modules across SSL, headers, DNS, ports, subdomains, technology fingerprinting, and CVE correlation. The authenticated scanning feature adds DAST behind stored credentials through cookie, bearer, basic, or form authentication so issues that only surface inside an authenticated session do not slip past anonymous scanning. The code scanning feature runs SAST and dependency analysis through Semgrep against a repository connected via GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket OAuth. The continuous monitoring feature runs daily, weekly, biweekly, or monthly scans on a schedule and writes the results back to the same engagement record.

How credentials and authorisation are handled before any scan runs

Authenticated scanning needs credentials to live somewhere durable, and external scanning needs proof of target ownership before any module fires. SecPortal stores credentials in an encrypted credential vault with AES-256-GCM, scoped to a verified domain. Every external scan is gated on domain verification through DNS TXT or meta tag, and the scan-guard codes (DOMAIN_NOT_VERIFIED, CREDENTIAL_DOMAIN_MISMATCH, AUTH_NOT_ALLOWED) refuse to run when the chain of evidence does not hold. The authorisation discipline lives in the workspace rather than inside a continuous AI-driven offensive testing service.

From scan to deliverable

The output of a scan is the beginning of a deliverable, not the end. SecPortal turns scan results into draft findings, the operator triages and validates them, the findings management layer holds the consolidated record with CVSS vectors, evidence, and remediation, and the AI reports feature generates the executive and technical narrative the recipient receives. The branded client portal is where the deliverable lands; the API security testing workflow covers how authenticated DAST output, manual API findings, and spec-driven proofs come together on one engagement.

For internal security teams that want to run an Escape deployment for continuous AI offensive testing and a SecPortal workspace for engagement delivery in parallel, the remediation tracking workflow and the security testing programme management workflow cover how findings from multiple sources move from intake to closure with named owners, SLA tiers, and an audit trail. The importing third-party scanner results guide documents the verified Nessus, Burp Suite, and CSV import paths when the team wants to consolidate AI offensive testing output and SecPortal native findings on the same engagement record.

How continuous AI validation translates into engagement findings

AI Pentesting validation chains from a platform like Escape describe the steps a validated exploit traversed (a broken object-level authorisation request that bypassed the intended check, a mass-assignment payload that wrote unexpected fields, an authorisation chain that elevated privileges through a sequence of permitted endpoints). Promoting those validated chains into engagement findings is the operator workflow on the SecPortal side: the AppSec or product security operator reviews the AI-validated chain, reproduces the underlying vulnerability against the application, writes the finding with reproduction steps and a CVSS vector through the findings management layer, and routes it to the engineering owner through the ownership and routing workflow. The AI validation captures that an exploit path was reachable; the engagement finding captures the underlying defect that has to be fixed in code or configuration, recorded under your brand for the recipient who reads the deliverable.

Honest scope: what SecPortal does not do

SecPortal is a security testing and delivery workspace. It is not an AI-powered offensive security platform, not an Attack Surface Management product, not a business-logic DAST engine, and not an AI pentesting agent. The capabilities below are intentionally out of scope so the buyer can read the comparison accurately.

SecPortal does not run a continuous Attack Surface Management layer that catalogues the API, web application, and infrastructure footprint from cloud, code, gateway, and DNS signals on a real-time basis.
SecPortal does not ship a Business-Logic-Aware DAST engine that walks multi-step authorisation chains, workflow state machines, and access-control matrices as a primary scanning lane.
SecPortal does not provide AI Pentesting that drafts proof-of-exploit chains, automated attack reasoning, or per-finding validation walkthroughs without operator-led reproduction.
SecPortal does not generate per-framework AI-assisted remediation code snippets tailored to specific stacks (React, Django, Spring Boot, Express, FastAPI, Rails); remediation guidance lives in the finding template library and the AI-drafted report sections.
SecPortal does not ship packaged push connectors into Jira, ServiceNow, Slack, Teams, PagerDuty, SIEM, SOAR, WAF, GRC, CMDB, MCP servers, or AI coding IDE assistants such as Cursor, Claude Code, or Gemini; integration into those systems is the workspace consumer responsibility, not a managed offering.
SecPortal does not run as a native plug-in to third-party risk platforms such as Wiz; consolidation of findings across third parties uses the verified Nessus, Burp Suite, and CSV import paths into the engagement record.
SecPortal does not provide enterprise SSO, SCIM provisioning, or SAML federation; workspace authentication uses email and password with mandatory MFA via TOTP.
SecPortal does not act as the bench delivering managed offensive testing on demand; the workspace serves the team delivering its own engagements rather than carrying a vendor pentest service.

Adjacent comparisons

If the evaluation is between Escape and other API security platforms, AI-driven security testing tools, business-logic DAST products, or AppSec delivery workspaces, the comparisons below cover the same buying decision from different angles.

SecPortal vs Salt Security for the behavioural API security platform comparison anchored on out-of-band analysis of mirrored production traffic, continuous endpoint discovery, and API posture governance.
SecPortal vs Noname Security for the runtime API security platform comparison covering Noname (now Akamai API Security) with continuous endpoint discovery, posture management, runtime threat detection, and pre-production Active Testing.
SecPortal vs Wallarm for the inline runtime API protection comparison.
SecPortal vs StackHawk for the developer-first CI-pipeline DAST comparison driven by an OpenAPI, Postman, GraphQL, or HAR specification.
SecPortal vs Probely for the managed SaaS DAST scan engine comparison.
SecPortal vs Acunetix for the dedicated web and API vulnerability scanner comparison.
SecPortal vs Invicti for the DAST-anchored enterprise web application scanning comparison.
SecPortal vs Burp Suite for the manual application and API security testing tool comparison.
SecPortal vs Detectify for the external attack surface monitoring comparison.
SecPortal vs Edgescan for the Hybrid PTaaS continuous managed-validation comparison.
SecPortal vs Intruder for the SaaS continuous external and authenticated scanner comparison.
SecPortal vs Checkmarx for the enterprise AppSec portfolio comparison including Checkmarx API Security.
SecPortal vs Veracode for the enterprise AppSec platform comparison.
SecPortal vs Snyk for the developer-first AppSec platform comparison.
SecPortal vs Aikido for the bundled developer-first AppSec platform comparison.
SecPortal vs Pentera for the automated security validation (BAS-adjacent) comparison.

When the work is scoped engagement delivery, native scanning, and AI reporting on a workspace your team operates, not a continuous AI-powered offensive testing programme

Run scoped AppSec, pentest, vulnerability management, and API security engagements, generate AI reports, and ship findings through a branded portal on one workspace. SAST plus dependency analysis plus DAST plus external scanning live on the same engagement record alongside manual finding entry, the exception register, the retest workflow, and the activity audit trail. Pair alongside an Escape deployment when continuous AI offensive testing sits next to scoped engagement delivery for application owners, auditors, or external clients. Start free.