The push to‘ shift left’ has driven adoption of SAST and pre-deployment tools, but those tools often struggle with false positives and lack production insight.
Platform fatigue and tooling trade-offs
With security spending under scrutiny, CISOs must also decide between best-of-breed point tools and broader security platforms. Point tools can offer deep capabilities – like focused API scanning – but come with complexity and integration costs. Platforms offer broader coverage and consolidated reporting but may sacrifice depth in key areas.
Smart CISOs are aligning tool selection with organisational priorities. For runtime risk reduction, dynamic tools like DAST are proving indispensable. When regulatory reporting or executive visibility is more critical, centralised platforms may offer more value.
The key is to avoid over-investing in low-signal tooling. Instead, organisations should emphasize visibility into real-world risk – how an application behaves under attack, not just how it looks in theory.
Shift smart, not just left
The push to‘ shift left’ has driven adoption of SAST and pre-deployment tools, but those tools often struggle with false positives and lack production insight. Meanwhile, runtime environments – where the real threats play out – remain under-protected.
‘ Shifting smart’ means investing based on risk impact. While early-stage analysis is valuable, it shouldn’ t come at the expense of runtime security. This more nuanced approach helps teams focus resources where they can actually move the risk needle.
The value of DAST in constrained environments
DAST provides an outside-in perspective by scanning live applications as attackers would. Unlike static tools that often flag theoretical issues, DAST identifies vulnerabilities that are actively exploitable. This focus is particularly valuable when budgets are
26 WWW. INTELLIGENTCISO. COM