thejoydeepdey
New Arrival
I’ve been experimenting recently with an internal agentic pentesting setup, and it’s been quite different from the traditional automated scanning workflow most of us are used to.
One thing I noticed early is how much time usually gets wasted validating false positives from scanners. With the agent-based approach, the system attempts to verify findings before surfacing them, which has actually reduced a lot of unnecessary noise during testing.
It’s definitely not something I’d trust to replace manual testing, especially for business logic vulnerabilities and context-heavy issues where human reasoning still matters a lot. But for reconnaissance, repetitive checks, and initial triage, it seems genuinely useful so far.
I’m curious whether others here have tested similar AI-assisted or agentic security workflows yet. Are the current tools actually improving productivity for you, or does it still feel more experimental than practical at this stage?
One thing I noticed early is how much time usually gets wasted validating false positives from scanners. With the agent-based approach, the system attempts to verify findings before surfacing them, which has actually reduced a lot of unnecessary noise during testing.
It’s definitely not something I’d trust to replace manual testing, especially for business logic vulnerabilities and context-heavy issues where human reasoning still matters a lot. But for reconnaissance, repetitive checks, and initial triage, it seems genuinely useful so far.
I’m curious whether others here have tested similar AI-assisted or agentic security workflows yet. Are the current tools actually improving productivity for you, or does it still feel more experimental than practical at this stage?
