Answer.

The idea of automating security checks for applications has evolved as cyber threats have increased. Initially, security testing was almost entirely manual, but the development of DevOps and automation allowed for the integration of security checks into CI/CD pipelines.

Background

In the early years, manual penetration testing (pentesting) and scanners were the only tools for vulnerability assessments. Later, separate automated scanners began to emerge in development, followed by entire platforms that integrate into processes.

Challenges

Security tests are often time-consuming and rarely updated.
Numerous false positive alerts.
The need for complex configuration according to infrastructure and the application.
Not all vulnerabilities can be found automatically; some checks require expert analysis.

Solutions

Embed automated security tests in the CI/CD stage: use DAST/SAST analyzers, automatic scanners (OWASP ZAP, SonarQube, Checkmarx, etc.).
Regularly update reports and testing scenarios, set up handling for false positives.
Combine automation with periodic manual audits and retrospectives.

Key Features:

SAST/DAST/RASP scanning
Integration with CI/CD
Incident response handling and automation

Tricky Questions.

Is it possible to find all vulnerabilities solely with automated tests?

No, automated checks cover only a portion of security risks (e.g., XSS, SQL injections). Manual auditing is also necessary for completeness.

Is one type of scanner — SAST or DAST — sufficient for quality protection?

No, SAST analyzes code statically before the application runs, while DAST evaluates the application’s behavior during operation. Both should be used, along with considering additional methods.

Should security tests in CI/CD be disabled to accelerate deployment?

No, this approach is dangerous — it jeopardizes product security.

Common Mistakes and Anti-Patterns

Ignoring scanner reports (false-positive fatigue)
Lack of integration between manual and automated approaches
Automating only one part of the security process

Real-Life Example

Negative Case

Security is only checked through manual analysis at the release stage and occasionally with a scanner; reports are not integrated into CI/CD.

Pros:

"Live" audit of complex vulnerabilities

Cons:

Discovery of issues at later stages
High cost of fixes

Positive Case

Security tests are deployed automatically in CI/CD; critical vulnerabilities block releases; rules for filtering false positives are configured; additional pentest sessions are held quarterly.