Autonomous penetration testing that proves what it finds

For recurring, breadth-first work, largely yes, and far more often than any human schedule allows. For a bespoke engagement against novel business logic, anything with a physical or social-engineering component, or a regulator who requires a named tester, people still matter. Most teams run AIPTx continuously and bring humans in for specialist depth. That is cheaper and safer than the reverse.

A scanner reports what matches its signatures. AIPTx tests its own hypotheses and confirms a finding only when the attack succeeds. The difference shows up in your queue: a scanner hands you a list to investigate; a confirmed finding hands you evidence to verify. It also shows up in what gets found at all. Business-logic and access-control flaws have no signature, and are only reachable by reasoning about what the application is meant to do.

Destructive actions are disabled by default. The agent will not delete data, run denial-of-service payloads or exhaust resources, and every run is bound by a configurable request rate. Exploitation proves access (reading one record, writing to a scratch path, retrieving a token) rather than causing damage. Teams wanting zero production risk point the agent at staging and run perimeter-only checks against production.

By requiring exploitation. A finding is validated only when the agent performs the attack and captures the exact HTTP request, the response proving it worked, and a reproducible curl command. No tool can promise zero false positives. What changes here is how quickly you can tell, and false_positive is a recorded status with a name and a date against it rather than a silent deletion.

Supply credentials, a session token, or an SSO service account per role. The agent maintains sessions across the run, re-authenticates when they expire, and cross-tests roles against each other. That last part is how horizontal and vertical access-control flaws surface. A low-privilege user reaching something they should not is only visible if the tool holds both sessions at once.

A target list, proof that you control it, and credentials for each role you want tested authenticated. Internal network and cloud testing need a connector or a read-only role. Most first assessments start within an hour of signup.

Yes. Quick Scans are built for pull-request gates via the GitHub, GitLab and Jenkins integrations, and you can fail a build on a severity threshold. Deeper assessments usually run on a schedule or against a release candidate rather than on every commit. A four-hour authenticated pentest does not belong in a merge queue.

Push the fix and request a retest. The agent re-runs that specific exploit against the changed code and closes the finding only when the attack stops working. Retest history is attached to the finding, which is also what makes the compliance export useful: it shows the fix, not just the report.

Access is role-based within your workspace, findings are encrypted at rest, and reports are scoped to the projects a user is assigned to. Results are never used to train shared models and are never shown to other customers.

Requirements differ by provider and by service, and they change. Check your provider's current penetration testing policy before scheduling a run against hosted infrastructure. Scope verification records what you authorised, which is usually what a provider asks for.