Category comparison
SAST and SCA identify code and dependency issues. ASPM aggregates and prioritizes those findings. GoSentrix verifies whether the evidence behind them satisfies customer-defined policy for a release decision.
SAST scans source code for patterns associated with security weaknesses. SCA inspects dependency manifests and known-vulnerability databases to flag risky open-source components. Both produce findings. Neither proves that a release is safe or that a claimed fix worked.
ASPM takes SAST, SCA, container, cloud, runtime, and other findings and correlates them into a prioritized posture view. It answers: across all our tools, what should we fix first?
| Dimension | SAST/SCA | ASPM | GoSentrix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary focus | Identify code and dependency issues | Aggregate and prioritize findings | Verify evidence for release decisions |
| Core question | What weaknesses exist? | What should we fix first? | Does evidence satisfy policy? |
| Input | Source code, dependency manifests | Aggregated scanner and runtime signals | Qualified evidence from existing tools |
| Output | Findings with severity | Prioritized findings and posture score | Proceed, Stop, Escalate, Require authorization |
| Evidence model | Pattern match, CVE data | Correlation, context, risk rank | Corroboration, freshness, policy version |
| Remediation proof | Retest or ticket closure | State tracked in posture | Validated fixes, not just ticket closure |
SAST (Static Application Security Testing) analyzes source code for security weaknesses. SCA (Software Composition Analysis) identifies open-source dependencies and their known vulnerabilities. SAST looks at custom code; SCA looks at third-party code.
SAST and SCA produce findings. ASPM aggregates findings from SAST, SCA, and other tools, correlates them, and prioritizes remediation. ASPM does not replace scanners; it organizes their output.
Reachability analysis determines whether a vulnerable function or dependency is actually invoked by the application. It helps teams focus on issues that are exploitable in context rather than every reported finding.
No. GoSentrix treats SAST and SCA findings as unverified claims. It evaluates whether the evidence behind a finding — including reachability, retest results, and reviewer attestation — satisfies policy for a release decision.
A plain-language definition of Application Security Posture Management.
How ASPM differs from vulnerability tracking and prioritization.
How GoSentrix qualifies evidence for consequential software decisions.
Canonical answers about verification, policy binding, and tool relationships.
GoSentrix evaluates SAST, SCA, and ASPM signals against versioned policy so release decisions can be defended later.
