Skip to content
GoSentrix

Finding-closure review for security teams

Less investigation to reach a defensible closure.

GoSentrix assesses whether evidence from your existing security and engineering systems supports a proposed finding closure, identifies what is missing, and prepares the case for your reviewer's decision.

Designed for security teams that have to explain serious-finding closures to an assessor, a bank or a customer.

Discuss a Finding Closure AssessmentSee an example case

Available today through a paid Finding Closure Assessment. The evidence sources it covers, and any human assistance involved, are agreed before it starts.

SEC-4471 · Production

Illustrative
Proposed closure
Remediated
Supporting records
  • Pull request mergedPresent
  • Mapped test passedPresent
  • Deployed artifact linkedMissing

    Next action: the deployment owner supplies the artifact identity.

Assessment
Deployment evidence is incomplete.
Support is missing. That is not a finding that the fix failed.
Decision
Your designated reviewer
Illustrative product concept. It shows the shape of a closure case, not output from a customer environment.

Keep your ASPM and Jira. Consolidate the investigation between them.

GoSentrix takes on the evidence-assessment work left between your existing systems. Discovery, remediation, tracking and approval stay where they are today.

Your existing systems

  • ASPM and scanners

    The finding and its severity

  • Code and CI

    The fix, the pull request and test runs

  • Deployment records

    What shipped, and where

  • Jira and policy

    The ticket and your closure criteria

GoSentrix

Closure assessment

Does the evidence support this closure?

  • Evidence checked against your criteria
  • Missing support, named
  • A specific next action and its owner

Your reviewer

Reviews the case

Makes the closure decision

Illustrative workflow. The source labels describe systems you may already use. They are not a list of supported integrations or partnerships.

What stays

  • Finding discovery and prioritization in your scanners and ASPM
  • Fixing and shipping through code, CI and deployment
  • Tracking and workflow in Jira
  • The closure decision, made by your reviewer

What GoSentrix takes on

  • Gathering the evidence for a proposed closure
  • Checking it against your closure criteria
  • Naming each gap and who can fill it
  • Preparing a case the next reviewer can inspect
How GoSentrix works alongside ASPM

Illustrative example · product concept

See why “fixed” is, or is not, supported.

One closure claim, traced through the evidence your systems already hold.

SEC-4471 · Production

Illustrative product concept · not customer output

Proposed closure

Marked Remediated in Jira

Decision

Your designated reviewer

Step 1 of 5 · The claim

SEC-4471 is marked remediated. A proposed closure is a claim to assess.

About 50 seconds. Starts only when you press play.

The same case, step by step

  1. 01

    The claim

    Criteria identified

    SEC-4471, a production finding, is marked remediated in Jira.

    What GoSentrix checks: What the closure needs under your criteria: a merged fix, a test mapped to the finding, and the fixed build running in production.

  2. 02

    Build evidence

    Supported

    Pull request #2318 merged the fix. CI build 5520 ran the mapped test, and it passed.

    What GoSentrix checks: Whether the merged change and the passing test both refer to this finding.

  3. 03

    Deployment evidence

    Cannot confirm

    The production deployment record lists a release, but not which build it contains.

    What GoSentrix checks: Whether the deployed artifact can be tied to build 5520.

  4. 04

    Missing connection

    Gap found

    No supplied record establishes the link between build 5520 and this production deployment. The evidence is incomplete; that is not proof the fix failed.

    What GoSentrix checks: Whether any other record closes the gap.

  5. 05

    Assessment and next action

    Ready for your reviewer

    Assessment: deployment evidence is incomplete. Next action: the deployment owner supplies the artifact identity.

    What GoSentrix checks: Who can resolve the gap, and what they need to provide.

Your reviewer sees the evidence, the gap and the open request together, and considers the completed evidence and remaining requirements before deciding. GoSentrix ran no tests and changed nothing in your systems.

Market context

AppSec is consolidating, and unresolved risk persists.

Security programs are bringing their tools together, and serious flaws still go unresolved for long periods.

Market forecast

80% by 2027

Gartner forecasts that by 2027, 80% of organizations in regulated verticals that use application-security testing will incorporate some form of ASPM, compared with 29% when the report was published.

A forecast for a defined population, not a measured adoption rate for all companies.

Gartner, Innovation Insight: Application Security Posture Management · January 9, 2025 · As quoted on Cycode’s public report page · Organizations in regulated verticals that use application-security testing
View source

Observed dataset

60%

Veracode reports that critical security debt affects 60% of organizations. Security debt of any severity affects 82%.

Security debt means flaws left unresolved more than a year after discovery. Critical security debt is the subset severe enough to cause serious damage if exploited.

Veracode, 2026 State of Software Security · February 24, 2026 · Organizations in Veracode’s dataset (analysis of 1.6 million applications)
View source

These sources describe the surrounding pressure, not your environment. A Finding Closure Assessment establishes whether the closure-review work that remains in yours is worth removing.

What each number does and does not support: research and methodology.

What does closure investigation cost your team?

Enter your own figures. The worksheet separates team capacity released from cash you would actually stop spending, and shows how much net time per case would cover a subscription.

Serious findings your team closes and may have to explain

per month

Hours spent gathering, reconciling and explaining evidence

hours

After time spent reviewing output, resolving gaps and supplying evidence

hours

Salary, benefits and overhead

$per hour

Only spending you would actually stop, such as contractor hours

$per year

Enter the figure you are evaluating

$per year

Assessment fee, setup and internal time. Leave blank if none.

$one-time

Your scenario

Illustrative economics · not a result
Current annual investigation cost
—

Closures × effort per case × hourly cost

Capacity released
—

Team time freed for other work, not cash saved

Value of capacity released
—

Capacity released × hourly cost

Cash spending avoided
$0

Only expense you would actually stop

Recurring net benefit
—

Capacity value + cash avoided − subscription. Team time is counted at its hourly value; it becomes cash only where spending changes.

First-year net benefit
—

Recurring net benefit − one-time costs, including the assessment fee

Break-even net reduction
—

Net hours saved per case at which capacity value plus cash avoided covers the subscription. Excludes one-time costs.

Net effort reduction must include the time your team spends reviewing GoSentrix's output, resolving gaps and supplying evidence. These figures are a scenario built from your inputs, not savings GoSentrix has achieved.

Formulas and assumptions: research and methodology.

GoSentrix evidence

Evidence status: early-stage offering

No controlled demonstration or customer outcome has been published, and we do not claim reduced review time. Current scope, and any human assistance, are agreed in the assessment.

What is available today, and what is still experimentalWhat a published result will state

Evaluate it on your own closures.

A Finding Closure Assessment looks at how your team closes serious findings today, and where the supporting evidence is missing or hard to assemble.

It is a paid engagement. The evidence sources it covers, and any human assistance involved, are agreed before it starts.

Discuss a Finding Closure AssessmentAbout the assessment

Illustrative evidence-gap worksheet

Illustrative evidence-gap worksheet row for closure case SEC-4471
Finding and proposed closureSEC-4471 · Remediated
Required supporting recordsMerged fix, mapped test, deployed artifact
Evidence availablePull request #2318 merged; mapped test passed in build 5520
Missing relationshipBuild 5520 → production deployment
Next-action ownerDeployment owner
Reviewer's decisionPending: your designated reviewer
One row of the assessment's evidence-gap baseline, shown with the illustrative SEC-4471 case. The fields used in your assessment are agreed when it is scoped.