Application Security Testing

What Is Application Security Testing?

Application security testing (AST) refers to techniques and tools to identify and mitigate security vulnerabilities in software applications. This process occurs at various stages of the software development lifecycle (SDLC) and targets issues such as insecure coding practices, backdoors, and misconfigurations. The goal is to ensure applications are resilient to attacks and compliant with security standards. A comprehensive AST program includes both manual testing methods and automated tools.

By systematically scanning, analyzing, and testing, AST helps organizations stay ahead of potential breaches caused by exploited software flaws. It spans a wide range of tools and methodologies, which vary in approach, depth, and timing. Whether implemented during development or after deployment, AST is integral to maintaining application integrity and protecting customer data.

Why Application Security Testing Matters

Modern applications are central to business operations and user interactions, making them high-value targets for attackers. Application security testing (AST) is essential because it helps organizations detect and remediate vulnerabilities before they can be exploited in the wild. This proactive approach prevents data breaches and supports business continuity by reducing downtime and disruption from cyber incidents.

Common threats such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting (XSS), and cross-site request forgery (CSRF) can expose sensitive data or allow unauthorized access if left unchecked. AST aid in identifying these weaknesses early, reducing both the cost and complexity of fixing them.

Beyond threat mitigation, AST also supports compliance with industry regulations and standards. Many frameworks—like PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and ISO 27001—require formal testing processes and documented evidence of security practices. By embedding AST into development workflows, organizations can satisfy these requirements more efficiently.

Finally, consistent application security testing promotes user trust and safeguards brand reputation. Demonstrating that your organization prioritizes secure software development builds confidence with customers, partners, and regulators alike.

Types of Application Security Testing Tools 

1. Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Static application security testing (SAST) is a white-box testing method that scans application source code, bytecode, or binaries for known vulnerabilities without executing the application. It’s usually integrated into development environments and runs automatically during coding or build processes.

How it works:

SAST tools parse the codebase and analyze control flows, data flows, and patterns to detect issues like:

• Input validation errors (e.g., SQL injection, command injection)
• Hardcoded secrets or credentials
• Insecure API usage
• Misuse of cryptographic functions

It works best early in the development lifecycle, allowing developers to remediate issues before the code reaches production.

Pros:

‍

• Enables early detection and resolution of vulnerabilities.
• Supports shift-left security and CI/CD integration.
• Pinpoints the exact location and cause of issues in the code.

Cons:

• Can generate high false positive rates.
• Struggles with application context, leading to missed logic errors.
• Requires access to full source code, which may not be feasible for third-party libraries or legacy applications.

2. Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Dynamic application security testing (DAST) is a black-box testing method that tests applications in their deployed state. It identifies vulnerabilities by simulating external attacks without needing access to the source code.

How it works:

DAST tools interact with the application via its front end, crawling and fuzzing inputs to discover:

• Injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS)
• Security misconfigurations
• Authentication and session management issues
• Broken access control

DAST is typically used in staging or production environments to assess risks and simulate attack techniques.

Pros:

• Effective at identifying real-world attack surfaces.
• Can often test any web-accessible application regardless of language or framework.
• Requires no source code access.

Cons:

• Limited visibility into application internals, potentially missing deep logic flaws.
• Difficult to authenticate into complex user flows.
• Typically slower and used later in the SDLC.

3. Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST)

Interactive application security testing (IAST) combines elements of SAST and DAST by running within the application’s runtime environment, often during functional testing. It has deep visibility into code execution and system interactions.

How it works:

An IAST agent is deployed inside the application server, monitoring execution paths, data inputs, and backend communications during real-time usage. It detects:

• Input validation errors
• API misuse
• Insecure dependencies
• Runtime configuration issues

IAST often operates during QA or automated testing, using real or simulated user behavior to trigger vulnerabilities.

Pros:

• High accuracy with minimal false positives.
• Provides detailed, actionable context for remediation.
• Aligns well with DevOps and agile development practices.

Cons:

• Requires configuration of runtime environments and testing scenarios.
• May introduce overhead in production-like environments.
• Can be complex to deploy in large-scale or containerized applications.

4. Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

Software composition analysis (SCA) focuses on analyzing the open-source and third-party components within an application. With the rise of component-based development, SCA is critical for identifying known vulnerabilities in reused libraries.

How it works:

SCA tools scan build files (e.g., package.json, pom.xml), binaries, and containers to identify libraries and their versions. They then compare this information against vulnerability databases like:

• National Vulnerability Database (NVD)
• GitHub Security Advisories
• CVE records

SCA can also track license compliance and governance policies.

Pros:

• Quickly identifies vulnerable and outdated dependencies.
• Enforces licensing policies and legal compliance.
• Integrates easily with build tools and CI/CD systems.

Cons:

• Cannot detect vulnerabilities in custom code or runtime behavior.
• May over-report issues from unused or unreachable code paths.
• Requires regular updates of vulnerability databases for accuracy.

5. Runtime Application Security

Runtime Application Security is a security approach focused on identifying and responding to threats at the application layer, leveraging deep visibility and behavioral analytics to detect anomalous or malicious activity in real time.

How it works:
Runtime Application Security platforms monitors code and operating system activity in real-time to spot critical vulnerabilities and malicious activity. They apply behavioral baselines, heuristic analysis, and threat intelligence to detect indicators of compromise (IOCs). Upon detection, Runtime Application Security systems may trigger alerts, offer vulnerability fixes, and more.

Typical detections include:

• Vulnerable third party dependencies
• Exploitation attempts of known vulnerabilities
• Abnormal access patterns or data exfiltration
  

Pros:

• Provides more accurate vulnerability detection by monitoring code in real-time.
• Complements other application security testing technologies.
• Helps reduce dwell time and limit attack impact.
  

Cons:

• May be cost-prohibitive for smaller teams or low-traffic applications.

6. Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)

Application security posture management (ASPM) provides centralized visibility and control over an organization’s application security tools, configurations, and risks. It enables continuous monitoring and governance across the entire application security stack.

How it works:
ASPM tools aggregate data from multiple sources—SAST, DAST, IAST, SCA, etc.—and correlate findings into a unified risk view. They track coverage, enforce policies, and highlight gaps or misconfigurations across the application portfolio. ASPM often integrates with CI/CD pipelines and ticketing systems for simplified workflows.

Capabilities typically include:

• Centralized vulnerability dashboards
• Risk scoring and prioritization
• Compliance tracking and reporting
  

Pros:

• Consolidates fragmented security data into a single source of truth.
• Improves coordination and prioritization across security and dev teams.
• Supports governance and audit readiness.
  

Cons:

• Dependent on integration quality and coverage of underlying tools.
• Can introduce complexity in multi-cloud or hybrid environments.
• Still emerging as a category, with varied maturity among vendors.

7. Penetration Testing

Penetration testing involves ethical hackers mimicking real-world attack techniques to find and exploit application vulnerabilities.

How it works:

Testers follow a structured process:

1. Reconnaissance – gather information about the target.
2. Scanning and enumeration – identify open ports, services, and technologies.
3. Exploitation – try to exploit identified weaknesses.
4. Post-exploitation – assess the impact and potential for lateral movement.

Pen tests often include manual analysis and tool-assisted scanning, targeting both technical flaws and business logic errors.

Pros:

• Simulates real attacker behavior, revealing exploitable vulnerabilities.
• Helps validate the effectiveness of existing security controls.
• Can uncover complex, multi-step attack vectors.

Cons:

• Time and resource-intensive.
• Results are only as good as the tester’s skill and test scope.
• Not suitable for continuous or automated testing; provides point-in-time insights only.

{{expert-tip}}

Integration of AST into the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC) 

Integrating application security testing into the SDLC ensures vulnerabilities are identified and resolved at each stage of development, reducing costs and improving security outcomes. Here is how to integrate AST into each stage of the development lifecycle:

1. Requirements and design phase: Security considerations should begin at the design level with threat modeling and secure design reviews. Identifying potential attack vectors early allows teams to build with security in mind.
2. Development phase: During coding, static application security testing (SAST) and software composition analysis (SCA) are integrated into development environments and CI/CD pipelines. This enables real-time feedback on security issues, such as insecure coding patterns or vulnerable dependencies.
3. Testing phase: Dynamic application security testing (DAST) and interactive application security testing (IAST) are used during functional and QA testing to detect runtime issues and logic flaws. These tools benefit from broader application context and test coverage.
4. Deployment and production: In staging or production environments, Runtime Application Security tools and periodic penetration testing help detect and block active threats. These methods ensure the application is protected against real-world attacks, including zero-day exploits.
5. Maintenance and monitoring: Post-deployment, continuous monitoring and regular retesting are critical. New vulnerabilities may emerge due to changes in code, libraries, or threat landscapes. Automation ensures consistent scanning while integrating alerts and reports into DevOps workflows.

Challenges of Application Security Testing 

Application security testing has become a critical part of cybersecurity strategies. However, it also raises several challenges for organizations.

False Positives/Negatives

AST tools can produce false positives—issues flagged as vulnerabilities that aren't exploitable—which waste developer time and reduce trust in security reports. At the same time, false negatives—missed vulnerabilities—can give a false sense of security and leave systems exposed. Striking a balance between sensitivity and accuracy is a persistent challenge, especially with complex applications and evolving threat patterns.

Tuning tools, customizing rulesets, and integrating contextual data (e.g., business logic) help reduce noise, but these efforts require ongoing maintenance and security expertise.

Performance Impact

Some AST methods, especially DAST and IAST, can slow down development and testing workflows due to the time-intensive nature of scans and the computational overhead they introduce. Organizations must weigh the trade-offs between depth of security coverage and performance, often requiring staging environments, scan scheduling, or selective testing to mitigate disruption.

Compliance Requirements

Security testing must align with regulatory standards such as PCI-DSS, HIPAA, or ISO 27001, which can impose strict guidelines on testing frequency, scope, and documentation. Navigating these requirements adds administrative overhead and can create friction if compliance goals diverge from development timelines.

AST programs must be structured to produce audit-ready outputs, maintain test logs, and ensure that findings are tracked and resolved. This demands coordination between development, security, and compliance teams, as well as tools that support traceability and reporting.

Best Practices for Effective Application Security Testing 

Test Early and Often

Security issues are cheaper to fix the earlier they are found. By embedding security testing into the earliest phases of development, teams can prevent vulnerabilities from ever reaching production. Start with threat modeling during the design phase to identify potential attack vectors and high-risk components.

Use static application security testing (SAST) directly in developers’ IDEs and CI pipelines to detect issues as code is written. This provides fast feedback and avoids bottlenecks later. During integration and QA stages, introduce dynamic testing (DAST) and interactive testing (IAST) to detect runtime and environment-specific flaws. In production, use runtime SCA tools, ADR and ASPM to identify and rapidly remediate security and compliance issues.

Automate Where Possible

Manual testing is indispensable for certain types of in-depth testing, but is not scalable. Automation ensures consistent, repeatable, and efficient application security testing across the entire SDLC. Integrate automated SAST, DAST, IAST, and SCA tools into your CI/CD pipelines to perform security checks with every build, test, or deployment.

Automation speeds up feedback loops, enabling developers to identify and fix issues immediately. It also reduces human error, ensures coverage across all components, and frees up security teams to focus on higher-order analysis like threat modeling and architecture reviews.

Ensure tools can be configured through APIs or scripting interfaces for full integration. Use automated policy enforcement to block deployments that fail critical security checks. Regularly review and tune automation configurations to adapt to evolving application changes and threat models.

Conduct Regular Code Reviews

While automated tools can catch many common issues, they often miss vulnerabilities related to application logic, data flow, and misuse of APIs. Manual code reviews fill this gap by providing human oversight into how code behaves in context. Schedule regular peer reviews that emphasize security concerns, especially for code handling authentication, authorization, data processing, and external communications.

Reviewers should follow structured checklists based on secure coding guidelines and past incidents. Encourage cross-functional reviews involving developers, architects, and security engineers for high-risk areas. When possible, conduct pair programming or security-focused walkthroughs for critical code paths.

Document findings and remediation actions clearly, and use code review tools that support inline comments and version tracking to ensure accountability and continuous improvement.

Enforce Secure Coding Standards

A formal set of secure coding standards provides developers with clear expectations and best practices to follow, reducing the likelihood of introducing vulnerabilities. These standards should be aligned with known security risks, such as the OWASP Top 10, and tailored to the languages, frameworks, and platforms used in your organization.

Secure coding policies should address common concerns such as input validation, output encoding, secure session management, proper error handling, and secure use of cryptographic functions. Integrate these standards into development workflows through training, documentation, and automated linting tools.

Ensure that code quality tools and SAST configurations reflect these standards and enforce them automatically. Periodically review and update standards to reflect new threats, technology shifts, or lessons learned from previous incidents.

Establish Clear Remediation Workflows

Identifying vulnerabilities is only half the battle—efficient remediation processes are essential for minimizing risk. Create workflows that define how security issues are triaged, assigned, fixed, and verified. Use ticketing or issue tracking systems to manage vulnerabilities alongside other development tasks, ensuring they are prioritized based on risk.

Define severity levels and response timelines for each category of vulnerability. Provide developers with detailed context for each finding, including reproduction steps, impacted components, business risk, and suggested fixes. Integrate these reports into developer-friendly dashboards or alerts to streamline remediation.

Establish escalation paths for high-risk or unresolved issues and involve stakeholders as needed. Track resolution metrics (e.g., mean time to remediate) to measure effectiveness and drive accountability across teams.

Expand Testing to Internal Interfaces

Public-facing endpoints often receive the most security scrutiny, but internal components can be equally vulnerable and are frequently overlooked. Internal APIs, admin consoles, message brokers, and service-to-service communications may lack strong access controls or proper input validation.

Security testing should include these interfaces using both automated tools and manual testing. Authenticate test agents to interact with internal components and use role-based scenarios to uncover access control and privilege escalation flaws. Analyze service meshes, container orchestration systems, and shared data stores for potential lateral movement vectors.

Use tools capable of inspecting non-standard protocols or service architectures. Consider deploying honeypots or monitoring agents in internal environments to detect anomalous interactions or unscanned components. A comprehensive testing approach that includes internal services significantly reduces blind spots and strengthens your application’s overall security posture.

Application Security Testing for Production Applications with Oligo

Oligo provides high-fidelity application security testing at runtime by monitoring code execution in real-time. Deployed as a single lightweight sensor on the host, Oligo identifies critical vulnerabilities without requiring access to source code or instrumenting any code. Learn more about our approach.