Free SAST: what you get, what you give up
Free static analysis tools catch real flaws, but OWASP lists high false positives and narrow coverage. Learn how to use them well and when to add more.
Deep dives, practical guides, and incident analyses from engineers who build Safeguard. No fluff, no vendor FUD — just what you need to ship secure software.
Free static analysis tools catch real flaws, but OWASP lists high false positives and narrow coverage. Learn how to use them well and when to add more.
Run SAST on pull requests for one repo, tune it for a month, then block only on high confidence findings. Plain steps for teams with no security hire.
Cut false positives in AI assisted code scanning: require evidence, check reachability, tune rules one at a time and measure precision on a sample.
Reachability asks whether your code can call a vulnerable function. For a tiny team it cuts alert noise. Pair it with two public exploit signals.
Recommend reachability analysis to rank dependency CVEs by whether your code can reach them, with EPSS and KEV data. Rank with it; do not delete findings.
Reachability analysis checks whether vulnerable code can actually be called. Regulated teams should ask about evidence, data residency and honest limits.
Ask which languages are covered, how unknowns are handled, whether verdicts show the path and export as VEX, and how KEV and EPSS are used. Eight asks.
Start with a plain dependency scan, run reachability in report-only mode, then gate only on reachable and actively exploited findings. A six step order.
Reachable does not mean exploitable. Combine static, runtime and configuration signals, keep unknown visible, and add exploitation data to cut the noise.
Weekly insights on software supply chain security, delivered to your inbox.
Your first fix PR is minutes away.
No sales call required, even your agent can complete the purchase over MCP.