Problem solved

Manual penetration testing is periodic, expensive, and difficult to scale, while traditional SAST, DAST, and SCA tools often produce large volumes of findings without proving exploitability. Keygraph addresses this by continuously testing applications with AI agents and validating vulnerabilities with working exploits, helping enterprises prioritize real risks and reduce remediation time.

Use cases

• Continuous black-box pentesting of deployed web applications
• White-box source code security testing with agentic SAST
• Automated business logic vulnerability discovery
• Software composition analysis for open-source dependency risks
• Secrets scanning across code repositories and CI/CD workflows
• Exploit validation and false-positive reduction for AppSec findings
• Tracking security posture, SLA compliance, and mean time to remediate
• Remediation guidance for confirmed vulnerabilities

Audience

• Enterprise
• Developers
• Startups

Pros

• Findings are validated with working exploits, which can reduce false positives compared with scanner-only output.
• Covers multiple AppSec workflows: whitebox/blackbox pentesting, SAST, SCA, secrets scanning, business logic, and remediation.
• Continuous testing model supports ongoing security coverage rather than point-in-time assessments.
• Includes dashboarding for findings, SLAs, risk trends, and MTTR.
• Free community program for early-stage startups and non-profits.

Cons

• Paid enterprise pricing; exact cost and tier details are not clearly public from the homepage.
• Requires deep access to source code and/or live applications to run agentic pentests.
• Exact coverage, accuracy, and benchmark performance are not independently documented on the homepage.
• SaaS delivery may not suit organizations requiring fully self-hosted or air-gapped AppSec tooling.
• Agentic security testing is an emerging category, so buyers may need to validate results against manual pentests.