Secure Code Review (SAST)
We analyze source code according to OWASP Secure Coding Practice Guidelines. This assessment includes Automated analysis as well as manual analysis of source code with reversing Binary Analysis of samples.
Secure Code Review (SAST)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST), also known as White-Box Testing, is a sort of security testing that examines an application’s source code to see if it has any security flaws.
SAST solutions examine the program “from the inside out,” eliminating the requirement to compile the code.
“SAST should be a mandatory requirement for all enterprises developing applications,” according to Gartner, and with 80 percent of assaults focused at the application layer, SAST is one of the best ways to ensure your Web Application Security and Mobile Application Security is solid.
Because SAST tools examine code before it is built without executing it, they can be used as early as feasible in the SDLC (software development lifecycle) to get the most out of security testing.
Many SAST solutions also scan uncompiled code, allowing for the earlier discovery of security flaws and saving up to 100 times the cost of bug fixes.
According to Gartner, SAST is one of the top techniques to ensure your application security is strong, with roughly 80% of assaults focused on the application layer.
How It Works
Manual, automatic, or a combination of the two, code review can be triggered by an automated signal or by a human.
Manual and automatic code reviews are combined in current best practices for performing robust and secure code reviews.
This two-pronged strategy catches the majority of potential problems.
Secure code review can happen at any point in the software development life cycle (SDLC), but it’s most effective when done early on because that’s when it’s easiest and quickest to repair bugs.
Using automated code review while developers are writing code, in particular, enables immediate adjustments as needed.
When performed during the commit phase or when a merge request is sent to the repository, manual code review is extremely beneficial.
It’s also a means to review code while keeping business logic and developer goals in mind.
Automated Review
Large codebases may be evaluated fast and efficiently with the automated review.
Developers conduct this evaluation while coding, using free source or paid tools to assist uncover vulnerabilities in real-time.
SAST tools, which can provide extra inputs, help uncover vulnerabilities, and allow developers to address them before the code is checked in, are used by the most advanced development teams.
Developers undertake their own self-reviews while they code in the most successful development processes.
Manual Review
A senior or more experienced developer does a thorough evaluation of the complete codebase as part of the manual review process.
This approach can be arduous and time-consuming, but it uncovers faults that automated techniques may miss, such as business logic issues.
Layering in QA tests can also help, but manual testing can still miss some instances.
Combining automatic and manual review is the ideal strategy.