Scans that take too long
An analysis that takes hours does not fit in a pipeline. Teams end up disabling it on working branches, and coverage drops.
The context
Why security belongs inside development
An application is no longer written from scratch: it assembles dependencies, third-party libraries and generated code, each bringing its own vulnerabilities. With AI coding assistants, a growing share of that code is produced automatically and merged without in-depth review: it can reproduce known flaws, call outdated libraries or embed secrets, at a pace manual review cannot keep up with. On top of that, mistakes easily slip into the code: hard-coded credentials and API keys, tokens stored in clear text. Once the application is published, secrets embedded in the binary can be extracted through reverse engineering.
Fixing these mistakes when they are written costs little. After release, the application has to be rebuilt and republished.
Requirements point the same way. DORA provides for financial entities a testing programme that may include source code reviews, and the CNIL recommends following levels L1 and L2 of the OWASP recommendations for mobile applications.
So that these checks don't slow down delivery, analysis must fit into the tools developers already use, the IDE and CI/CD, rather than adding a separate step.
The solution
How Pradeo fits into your chain
Pradeo's SAST integrates into development environments, in the IDE and in the CI/CD chain. Code produced by an AI assistant is analysed just like code written by your developers. It automatically analyses source code and classifies each vulnerability against the OWASP Top 10, the SANS Top 25 and the CVSS score, with remediation guidance based on good practices already present in the code.
The most critical vulnerabilities are highlighted in an action plan shared across teams, who keep their tools and handle results within their development chain, rather than in a separate step.