Interactive Application Security Testing vs Software Composition Analysis

Developers should use IAST during the development and testing phases of the software development lifecycle, particularly in CI/CD pipelines, to identify and remediate security vulnerabilities early meets developers should use sca when building applications with open-source libraries to proactively identify security vulnerabilities (e. Here's our take.

Interactive Application Security Testing

Nice Pick

Developers should use IAST during the development and testing phases of the software development lifecycle, particularly in CI/CD pipelines, to identify and remediate security vulnerabilities early

Pros

• It is especially valuable for web applications, APIs, and microservices where real-time analysis can catch issues that static tools might miss, such as runtime configuration problems or business logic flaws
• Related to: static-application-security-testing, dynamic-application-security-testing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Software Composition Analysis

Developers should use SCA when building applications with open-source libraries to proactively identify security vulnerabilities (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: dependency-management, vulnerability-assessment

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Interactive Application Security Testing if: You want it is especially valuable for web applications, apis, and microservices where real-time analysis can catch issues that static tools might miss, such as runtime configuration problems or business logic flaws and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Software Composition Analysis if: You prioritize g over what Interactive Application Security Testing offers.

The Bottom Line

Interactive Application Security Testing wins

Developers should use IAST during the development and testing phases of the software development lifecycle, particularly in CI/CD pipelines, to identify and remediate security vulnerabilities early