How Can I Automate Pen Testing?

TL;DR  

You can automate penetration testing by continuously discovering assets, running automated vulnerability scans, validating exploitability safely, and automatically retesting after fixes. The most effective approach integrates these workflows into CI/CD pipelines and pairs automation with human validation for complex risks.

The three basic steps to automate pen testing are:

1. Use automated scanners to map assets, identify common weaknesses, and run repeatable security checks across applications, APIs, and cloud environments. 
2. Pair these scans with automated testing pipelines that trigger tests after code changes, deployments, or new asset exposure.
   Tip: To reduce noise, apply risk scoring, filtering, and automated triage. 
3. Integrate results into ticketing systems for faster remediation. 

Automated Penetration Testing Methods and Techniques

Automated penetration testing uses scanners, AI-driven testing, and PTaaS platforms to identify vulnerabilities at scale. Each method varies in accuracy, depth, and ability to validate real exploitability.

Three main automated pen testing methods

The three primary automated penetration testing methods are:

1. Automated scanners  

Automated scanners run continuous, repeatable security checks and predefined rules and signatures to identify common vulnerabilities across applications, APIs, and infrastructure at scale. While automated scanners are effective for baseline checks, they cannot reason about context or discover novel attack paths and often generate false positives.

2. AI-driven pen testing methods

AI-driven pen testing uses machine learning and AI agents to simulate attacker behavior, adapt to findings in real time, and explore environments more intelligently than rule-based scanners. With AI-driven testing, new attack paths can be generated, likely exploits can be prioritized, and false positives can be reduced.

3. Penetration testing as a service (PTaaS)

PTaaS delivers continuous, on-demand security testing by combining automated scanning with human-led expertise. It provides validated, exploitable findings, real-time visibility, and integration into development and security workflows. Unlike scanners or AI-only methods, PTaaS pairs automation with skilled researchers to uncover complex vulnerabilities and confirm actual risk.

Synack recommends combining continuous automated scanning with on-demand human validation. The result is an automated pen testing process that scales across the attack surface while reserving human expertise for complex, high-impact issues. With Synack SmartScan®, you can automatically discover assets, test them for exploitable vulnerabilities, and reduce false positives. 

Two primary automated pen testing techniques

1. SAST (static application security testing) 

SAST analyzes source code, binaries, or bytecode without executing the application. It identifies insecure coding patterns, hardcoded secrets, input validation gaps, and other issues early in development. 

2. DAST (dynamic application security testing)  

DAST tests an application while it is running. It requires no access to source code and evaluates real-world behavior.  

Comparison of DAST and SAST in an automated pen testing context

Summary: SAST identifies vulnerabilities in code before execution, while DAST tests running applications to identify real-world, exploitable behavior.

	SAST	DAST
When it used	SAST is used early in development, before code is executed.	DAST is used against a running application in staging or production-like environments.
Access requirements	Access to source code, binaries, or bytecode is required for SAST.	No access is needed for DAST, because DAST runs externally, like an attacker.
Types of risks uncovered	SAST detects known vulnerabilities.	DAST identifies issues that have not been reported.
What is detects	SAST focuses on code-level vulnerabilities, such as:Insecure coding practices Buffer overflowsHardcoded secrets  Weak encryption  Logic errors and insecure functionsOutdated or misconfigured libraries	DAST focuses on runtime behaviors, exploitable vulnerabilities, and misconfigurations, such as:Injection flaws  Authorization and authentication issuesServer misconfigurations Insecure API endpointsExposed services
Primary Strengths	The primary strengths of SAST are:Finds issues earlySupports secure codingShifts security left	The primary strengths of DAST are:Detects real-world attack paths Validates how an application behaves in practice
Key Limitations	The main limitations of SAST are:Cannot detect runtime issues or environment-specific problems	The main limitations of DAST are:May miss deeper code-level flawsDepends on application functionality during testing
False positive rate	SAST can produce more false positives when code-level analysis is performed without context.	DAST produces fewer false positives because its findings reflect real execution.
Best use cases	SAST is best used to improve developer security practices and prevent defects pre-release.	DAST is best used to simulate attacker behavior and validate security controls in live environments.

What Components of a Traditional Penetration Test Are Most Suitable for Full Automation?

Traditional pen testing is not keeping pace with requirements. According to an ESG survey, 65% recognize that traditional pentesting is not a viable approach to cover their attack surface. 

However, components of traditional pen tests can be fully automated to support modern pen testing. They include functions that map cleanly to repeatable checks, signatures, or playbooks. Of the many traditional pen test components that can be automated, the top ten are:

1. Asset discovery and attack surface mapping
2. DNS enumeration and certificate transparency analysis
3. Open-source intelligence (OSINT) collection
4. Port scanning and service fingerprinting
5. Vulnerability scanning (known CVEs)
6. Web application crawling and parameter discovery
7. Automated credential attacks 
8. Configuration & security header checks
9. Automated exploit validation  
10. Continuous retesting and regression checks

Areas where traditional pen test components should be automated

Asset discovery and reconnaissance

Asset discovery and recon are ideal for automated agents, scripts, and continuous scanners, because the rules and steps are predictable, such as send probes, parse responses, and log assets. Examples of specific discovery tasks that should be automated include:

• Host and service discovery
• Port scanning
• Tech stack fingerprinting

Synack discovery and recon tools cut weeks of manual recon into continuous, near-real-time asset understanding. Synack’s automated pen testing tools can:

• Enumerate hosts, ports, and subdomains
• Correlate CT logs, DNS data, and cloud exposure
• Profile the external attack surface

Vulnerability scanning and known-issue detection

Vulnerability scanning and known-issue detection are the most automatable components of pen testing because they are signature- and rule-based. Examples of functions that can be automated are:

• Network and host vulnerability scanning
• Web application scanning  
• Configuration and baseline checks

The Synack platform is ideal for automating vulnerability scanning and known-issue detection. It catches issues at scale with:

• Automated scanning engines tuned for accuracy
• Continuous vulnerability checks
• Coverage for misconfigurations, common CVEs, and OWASP issues

Safe exploit verification for vulnerabilities

Because there is a real risk of data loss, corruption, or outages during exploit verification, not all exploit verification can be automated. Full automation is recommended when preconditions are deterministic, and safety checks can be enforced, such as:

• Validate PoCs for well-understood CVEs
• Trigger benign commands to prove remote code execution (RCE)
• Confirm traversal or auth-bypass conditions safely

Customers who use Synack get validated, reproducible findings. The Synack platform provides:

• Safe, controlled PoC validation
• Platform-level guardrails
• Automated proof collection

Regression and continuous retesting

With automation, one-off manual checks become automated controls. Automated scripts and agents can repeatedly run the same check indefinitely after a vulnerability is found and fixed. Key automated functions for regression and continuous testing include:

• Retest automatically after each release
• Continuously scan for reintroduced or similar issues
• Verify that mitigations are effective
• Re-execute the same exploit or check after each release
• Update dashboards and tickets with pass/fail evidence

Synack converts pentesting from a once-a-year exercise into a closed-loop security control. It supports continuous automated functions, such as:

• Ongoing host monitoring
• Re-testing after fixes
• Alerting when conditions change
• Tracking remediation effectiveness

Evidence collection and reporting  

A number of operational aspects of pen testing can be automated to improve efficiency, reduce manual work, ensure consistency, and reduce human error during evidence collection. Several areas that are ideal for automation include: 

• Gathering log data, screenshots, and transcripts
• Structuring findings
• Pre-populating report templates

Customers use Synack to automate:

• Data capture  
• Finding classification and prioritization
• Integration with SIEMs, Jira, and ticketing
• Report scaffolding

Pen testing components that are not good fits for full automation

Not all penetration testing activities can or should be automated.

Areas of pen testing that are not suited for automation are those that require:

• Real judgment
• Assessment of risk narratives and business impact
• Prioritization of decisions  
• Negotiation and clarification with stakeholders

Among the components of pen testing that should not be automated are those that involve:

• Scoping and rules of engagement
• Legal, contractual, and business-risk decisions
• Social engineering and physical security tests
• Human psychology, ethics, and unpredictable reactions
• Complex exploitation chains
• Contextual risk assessment

Benefits and Advantages of Automating Pen Tests

Automated and manual penetration testing are complementary. Automation provides scale and speed, while manual testing delivers depth and creative attack discovery.

Automated pen testing helps security teams take the offensive against cyber threats. By continually seeking out vulnerabilities and suspicious activity, issues can be detected and remediated before an incident occurs. Additionally, automated pen testing eliminates tedious, time-consuming tasks, allowing valuable human resources to focus on more strategic, high-value functions. Among the many benefits and advantages of automating pen testing are:

• Accelerated discovery of issues 
• Continuous, always-on testing
• Broader and more consistent coverage across large environments
• Reduced human error
• More accurate prioritization
• Safe, controlled exploit verification
• Less labor required for discovery, scanning, and evidence collection 
• Faster remediation Cycles
• Standardized, audit-ready evidence collection and reporting 

Realize the benefits of automated pen testing by using Synack to automate the most repeatable parts of pentesting—asset discovery, scanning, exploit validation, and retesting. Customers get continuous coverage, validated results without noise, faster remediation, and audit-ready evidence, all in a governed, scalable platform. Synack features that deliver these benefits include the following.

Continuous, intelligence-driven testing	Synack automates reconnaissance, scanning, and asset discovery through its platform, delivering always-on visibility rather than a single annual snapshot. Customers instantly see new assets, exposed services, and emerging vulnerabilities.
Validated vulnerabilities, not scanner noise	Synack’s automated engines surface issues using AI and machine learning. The results are no unverified scanner output, faster remediation prioritization, and high-confidence, actionable findings.
Safe, automated exploit verification	Synack automates PoC execution under strict guardrails, ensuring verification is safe, repeatable, and compliant. Customers get real evidence without operational risk.
Faster remediation through automated retesting	Once a fix is deployed, Synack automatically reruns checks and provides immediate confirmation, transforming pentesting into a closed-loop remediation control rather than a static report.
Complete attack surface coverage at scale	Synack uses automation to map large, complex environments, including cloud, hybrid, APIs, and web apps, and route meaningful leads to researchers, enduring broad, consistent coverage without overwhelming human testers.
Amplifies researcher efficiency	Automation handles mechanical tasks so researchers can focus on complex functions that require human skills, such as assessing logic flaws, multi-step exploit chains, creative attack paths, and zero-day discovery. This hybrid model dramatically increases the depth and quality of findings.
Streamlined evidence collection and reporting	The Synack platform automatically captures logs, transcripts, screenshots, and timestamps. Reports are pre-structured and standardized, ensuring that evidence is complete, audit-ready, and easy to share with developers and leadership
Stronger governance, compliance, and auditability	Synack automation enforces scope boundaries, logging, and execution policies. It provides full audit trails of activities, continuous compliance evidence, and documented testing methodologies.
Lower operational burden on security teams	With Synack, security teams do not need to coordinate manual testers, repeat tests, or manage multiple tools. Synack centralizes everything. It automates scanning, human testing, reporting, and retesting on a single, centralized platform.

What Compliance and Regulatory Requirements Can Be Met or Supported by Automated Penetration Testing?

Automated penetration testing helps organizations meet or support a wide range of security requirements to comply with laws and industry rules. It directly addresses requirements mandating regular testing, continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, and validation of security controls. Automated pen testing meets the compliance requirements for many regulatory and industry-specific security rules, including the following.  

Regulation	Compliance requirement	Pen testing automation support
PCI DSS	Regular vulnerability scanning, internal and external penetration testing, and validation of segmentation controls	Ongoing scanningFast retesting after remediationEvidence collection for auditorsContinuous validation of system changes
HIPAA Security Rule	Regular review of technical safeguards and risk assessments	Continuous vulnerability detectionEvidence for risk analysesVerification of safeguards around ePHI systems
NIST 800-53, 800-171, and CMMC	Ongoing vulnerability management and penetration testing	Continuous scanningAutomated retestingRepeatable compliance evidenceChange-detection alerts
SOC 2	Demonstrating the effectiveness of security controls	Continuous monitoringDocumented vulnerability management workflowsEvidence of remediation timelinesRepeatable, audit-ready reporting
ISO 27001	Automation aligns with controls for vulnerability management, technical testing, secure configuration, and continuous improvement	Automated testing supports:Continuous security validationDocumented evidence for audit cyclesDetection of nonconformities
GDPR	While GDPR does not explicitly mandate pentesting, it requires “appropriate technical and organizational measures”	Ongoing vulnerability managementProactive risk mitigationContinuous validation of security controls around personal data
FFIEC	Regular penetration testing, ongoing vulnerability management, and evidence for boards and auditors	Continuous coverage for high-risk banking systemsFaster remediation verificationConsistent audit evidence
NIS2	Continuous risk management and regular testing and validation of cybersecurity controls	Continuous testing and asset discovery Evidence for supervisory authorities

Synack’s automated pentesting supports compliance with PCI DSS, HIPAA, NIST 800-53, NIS 800-171, CMMC, SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIS2, FFIEC, and GDPR by providing:

• Continuous asset discovery
• Ongoing vulnerability scanning and detection
• Automated retesting  
• Proof of remediation
• Automated evidence capture 
• Audit-ready reporting
• Documented testing workflows
• Repeatable, standardized testing methodologies

Automated vs. Manual Penetration Testing: A Comparison of Effectiveness and Cost

Automated and manual pentesting are complementary, not competing, but each approach has pros and cons. Organizations achieve the strongest security posture by combining both methods.

	Automated pen testing	Manual pen testing
Coverage	Broad, continuous, and scalable	Deep and targeted, but limited scalability
Speed	Instant, real-time	Slower, scheduled
Findings	Known vulnerabilities and misconfigurations	Complex, creative flaws
Accuracy	High for signatures	High for contextual issues
Cost	Lower, predictable	Higher, variable

Synack offers flexible pricing with Synack Credits. Credits are consumed when you launch tests. Unlike bug bounty programs, the number and severity of vulnerability findings do not affect the credit price of your tests. Synack handles vulnerability payouts and rates for you. More on Synack’s automated testing pricing.

Automated Penetration Testing vs. Continuous Vulnerability Scanning

Automated penetration testing provides deeper, attacker-like testing that validates exploitability and uncovers complex issues beyond simple signatures. Continuous vulnerability scanning provides broad, ongoing detection of known vulnerabilities and misconfigurations but lacks context, exploit validation, and depth.  

Synack offers both pen testing approaches. 

1. Automated penetration testing
   Synack’s PTaaS delivers automated and continuous penetration testing with AI-assisted workflows and expert validation.
2. Continuous vulnerability scanning
   Synack’s vulnerability discovery and management features provide continuous evaluation and prioritized vulnerability insights similar to scanning, but with higher confidence and actionable context.

Pros and cons of automated pen testing and continuous vulnerability scanning

	Automated pen testing	Continuous vulnerability scanning
Purpose and depth	Simulates attacker techniques using automated tools and workflows.Goes beyond detection to validate exploitability, attempt safe exploitation, and uncover chained issues.Blends automation with human insight (depending on the platform).Produces evidence-based findings with contextual impact.	Identifies known vulnerabilities, exposure points, missing patches, and misconfigurations.Uses signatures, version checks, and rule-based detections.Does not attempt exploitation or verify impact.Outputs technical findings that may include false positives.
Coverage frequency	Can be run ad hoc, scheduled, or triggered after code releases.More frequent than manual pentesting, but not necessarily continuous unless part of a PTaaS platform.	Runs continuously or on set intervals, such as daily or weekly.Ideal for maintaining baseline security hygiene.
Types of findings	Discovers both known and some unknown issues (e.g., insecure logic, chaining opportunities).Validates whether vulnerabilities are exploitable.Produces actionable, prioritized results.	Limited to known vulnerabilities based on CVE databases, fingerprints, and configurations.Does not uncover business logic flaws or chained vulnerabilities.
Accuracy and validation	Often includes automated exploit verification and human validation (in hybrid models like Synack).Reduces false positives significantly.	Continuous Vulnerability ScanningHigher false-positive potential.Requires manual triage to confirm legitimacy.
Cost and operational impact	More expensive than scanning but cheaper and faster than traditional manual pen tests.Delivers high ROI through validated findings and reduced remediation cycles.	Lower cost and easy to deploy.Useful for broad hygiene but lacks depth of attack simulation.

Best use cases for automated pen testing and continuous vulnerability scanning

Use automated penetration for:

• Compliance-driven testing
• Pre-release security validation
• High-value assets and critical applications
• Exploit validation and remediation confirmation
• Attack simulation without heavy manual labor

Use continuous vulnerability scanning for:

• Routine patching and hygiene
• Large cloud or hybrid environments
• Maintaining asset inventories
• Identifying common misconfigurations
• Baseline security monitoring

Tools for Automated Penetration Testing

Automated penetration testing tools fall into three categories: open-source scanners, commercial platforms, and hybrid PTaaS solutions.

Automated penetration testing tools are crucial for continuous security monitoring, vulnerability discovery, and validation of potential exploits across components of an organization’s attack surface. Below are several examples of open-source and commercial automated testing tools.

Open-source automated penetration testing tools

Open-source tools are cost-effective, highly customizable, and supported by large, active security communities. These tools are the common go-to for pen testers.

• OWASP ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy)
  An automated scanner for web application link discovery and passive scanning 
• Metasploit Framework
  Contains thousands of exploit modules to validate vulnerabilities on networks, systems, and applications  
• Nmap (Network Mapper)
  Automated vulnerability checks for network discovery and reconnaissance
• OpenVAS (Open Vulnerability Assessment System)
  A comprehensive scanner that checks networks and systems against an extensive, regularly updated database of known vulnerabilities
• SQLmap
  Automates the process of detecting and exploiting SQL injection flaws and taking over database servers
• Nikto
  Automates checks against web servers for known vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, outdated software, and dangerous files

Commercial Tools to Automate Vulnerability Discovery and Exploit Validation

Commercial solutions often offer greater automation, better reporting, and support services. Most of these tools provide coverage across network infrastructure, operating systems, and applications.

• Synack Penetration Testing as a Service (PTaaS)
  Combines Agentic AI with a global, vetted community of security researchers to deliver continuous, on-demand testing that validates the exploitability of all findings to eliminate false positives and ensures focus on high-impact, actionable risks related to web app, API, and cloud environment vulnerabilities
• PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional
  Automated DAST scanner for Web and API security testing
• Tenable Nessus
  Network and infrastructure scanning for vulnerability assessments of networks, cloud environments, and infrastructure     
• Rapid7 InsightVM
  Vulnerability management and prioritization with risk scoring, automated asset discovery, and exploit validation  
• invicti
  Automated web app vulnerability scanner for identifying vulnerabilities and generating proof of exploit
• Pentera
  Breach and attack simulation (BAS) for simulating breach scenarios with known vulnerabilities to validate risk and attack paths
  

Tools for Automated Mobile Application Penetration Testing

Mobile application testing requires specialized tools that can perform a combination of both static (SAST) and Dynamic (DAST) analysis. The following are several examples of open-source and commercial tools available for mobile app pen testing.  

• Synack Penetration Testing as a Service (PTaaS)—commercial
  Provides continuous, hybrid mobile app penetration testing by combining automation with expert human testers to uncover vulnerabilities in iOS and Android apps.
• NowSecure—commercial
  Integrates automated SAST/DAST into the CI/CD pipeline for Android and iOS apps.
• Checkmarx—commercial
  Focuses on SAST for iOS and Android app source code to detect vulnerabilities throughout the development lifecycle.
• Mobile Security Framework—open source
  Provides SAST/DAST for iOS and Android apps during development and when the app is executed
• Frida—open source
  Allows pen testers to inject scripts into running apps to modify behavior, intercept functions, and bypass security controls for iOS and Android apps at runtime

Comparison of Open-Source and Commercial Automated Pen Testing Tools for Cloud-Native Applications

Feature	Open-Source Tools	Commercial Tools
Cost	Free	Subscription-based
Primary focus	Point solutions	Unified platforms
False positives	High	Low
Integration and usability	Requires significant developer effort to build custom frameworks, integrations, and reporting	Turnkey integration with CI/CD, ticketing (Jira), and major clouds with user-friendly dashboards
Support	Community-driven	Dedicated vendor support

How Synack compares to other tools for automated penetration testing

	Synack PTaaS	PTaaS	Traditional testing	Automated testing	Bugy bounty
Metrics that demonstrate security progress over time	✓	—	—	—	—
On-demand reports for compliance requirements	✓	✓	—	✓	—
Dedicated customer success and operations teams	✓	—	—	—	—
Diverse perspectives from global security pros	✓	—	—	—	✓
Incentive-driven testing, where researchers are paid per finding	✓	—	—	—	✓
AI agents to perform tests or assist security pros	✓	—	—	—	—
Integrations to consume findings in other platforms, such as Jira and  ServiceNow	✓	✓	—	—	—
Dedicated triage team for noise reduction	✓	—	—	—	—
Centralized SaaS platform for testing across a distributed enterprise	✓	✓	—	—	✓
Managed researcher payouts and predictable costs	✓	—	—	—	—

What Are the Challenges and Limitations of Automated Penetration Testing Tools?

Automated penetration testing has clear limitations and requires human oversight to assess business risk and complex attack paths.

Automated penetration testing is limited in its ability to:

• Detect complex vulnerabilities
• Understanding business logic
• Handle dynamic environments
• Validate exploitability

Automated testing tools cannot assess real business risk and require human oversight to identify false positives. Automated testing works best when paired with human expertise for creative exploitation and contextual prioritization, as Synack’s approach demonstrates.

Synack overcomes the limitations of automated pentesting by combining AI-enabled automation with expert human researchers. This hybrid model eliminates noise, increases depth, and provides continuous, high-confidence security testing.

	Automated pen testing tool challenge	Synack’s automated pen testing solution
Detecting complex, logic, and chained vulnerabilities	Automation struggles with multi-step exploits, logic flaws, and novel attack paths.	Expert, vetted researchers perform creative exploitation. Researchers use platform-generated signals, hints, and automated discoveries as starting points.
False positives	Automated tools often produce noisy, unverified findings.	All vulnerabilities delivered to customers are human-validated by the Synack researchers to ensure that the findings are exploitable, reproducible, and safe.
Adding business and contextual risk understanding	Automation lacks awareness of workflow intent, data sensitivity, and real impact.	Synack researchers prioritize findings based on impact, exploit chains, and real-world risk. They also produce reports that include context-rich narratives, proof-of-exploit evidence, and practical remediation guidance.
Safe exploit execution	Automated exploitation can break systems or cause outages.	Synack uses controlled PoC frameworks and automated guardrails with humans verifying exploitability safely when automation alone would be risky.
Handling authentication, MFA, APIs, and Complex workflows	Automated tools struggle with modern auth flows and dynamic app states.	Synack researchers manually navigate authentication, privilege models, and multi-step flows. The Synack platform supports API testing, authenticated testing, and role-based scenarios.
Managing dynamic cloud, container, and microservice environments	Automation often misses ephemeral assets and rapidly changing environments.	Synack’s platform provides continuous discovery and real-time asset visibility, while automated scans and human researchers maintain coverage across shifting environments.
Understanding attack patterns	Automated tools can’t reason about nuanced attack paths or business logic.	Synack combines creative attacker intuition and decades of combined expertise with its platform to amplify researcher capabilities with automation, analytics, and vulnerability signals.
Providing high-quality reporting and strategic insights	Automation produces raw data, not business-ready reporting.	Synack’s reports include validated evidence, impact narratives, and remediation details. Additionally, Synack’s automated evidence capture (e.g., screenshots, logs, and transcripts) is combined with researcher insights.

Best Practices for Configuring and Running Automated Security Penetration Tests

The following best practices outline how to configure, run, and operationalize automated penetration testing programs.

Best practices should be integrated into the main steps of automated pen testing. These involve integrating testing throughout the development lifecycle, ensuring thorough coverage, and maximizing the value of the results.

1. Preparation and configuration

• Define the scope and objectives, including:
  • Specify what systems, applications, and networks will be tested. 
  • Establish the goals of the test. 
  • Focus testing on specific network segments or critical assets.
• Establish a secure, non-production testing environment that accurately mirrors the production configuration to run destructive or invasive tests.
• Use standardized frameworks and methodologies that align testing with established frameworks to ensure consistency and comprehensive coverage.
• Configure the tool’s speed and resource consumption to prevent overloading network resources, degrading system performance, or causing unintended downtime.
• Manage test data securely by using synthetic or anonymized data for testing instead of actual customer or personal information (PII). 
• Keep tools and vulnerability databases up to date to accurately detect the latest threats, including zero-day vulnerabilities and new misconfigurations.

2. Execution and integration

• Adopt a hybrid approach that blends automation for continuous, broad coverage, and repeatable tasks with periodic manual penetration testing by skilled professionals for deep analysis of complex business logic flaws and creative, nuanced attacks. 
• Integrate resting into the SDLC/DevOps pipeline, running tests as early as possible to help detect and fix security issues faster.
• Maintain a regular cadence for running a variety of external, internal, and hybrid tests to cover different parts of your attack surface and simulate real-world, multi-stage attacks.  
• Grant access to all relevant teams to ensure that security, IT operations, development, and compliance teams can access the testing tools and results to facilitate collaboration and quicker, holistic remediation.
• Develop a communication plan to ensure all stakeholders are informed about the test timing, potential impact, and findings.

3. Analysis and remediation

• Validate high-severity findings from automated tools to eliminate false positives before starting remediation. 
• Convert results into actionable intelligence to prioritize vulnerabilities by risk severity, exploitability, and affected systems and data.
• Focus on detailed reporting and remediation guidance that outlines the security flaw, its severity, and provides step-by-step remediation guidance that is easy for developers and IT teams to implement.
• Integrate findings with security workflows by linking test results with your SIEM, vulnerability management tools, and patch management workflows to create a continuous feedback loop and enforce patch management discipline.
• Train personnel to provide comprehensive training for security teams, developers, and IT staff on how to use the tools properly, interpret the results, and implement secure coding and configuration practices to prevent future issues.
• Retest after remediation to confirm that the identified vulnerabilities have been successfully fixed and that no new issues were introduced during the remediation process.

How Synack customers demonstrate automated testing best practices

Agile security for a fast-paced dev cycle

Domino’s processes millions of orders daily and pushes code every two weeks. To ensure security, Domino’s integrated pen testing into its rapid release cycle. Since traditional static testing could not keep up, Domino’s deployed Synack’s PTaaS, which provided continuous, agile security testing with real-time visibility and actionable insights.

Read customer story

Proactive threat uncovering

Freshfields, a global law firm, uses Synack for ongoing testing and rigorous tester screening. Synack uncovered real threats rather than just generating check-the-box reports. 

Read customer story

Gaining critical insights

A major Federal agency found that internal pen tests missed critical vulnerabilities. It engaged Synack to improve authority to operate (ATO) decision-making. After deploying Synack, the agency found that about a third of the 1,150 findings were high- or critical-severity, enabling better risk decisions.  

Read customer story

Trustworthy vulnerability data

A major retailer engaged Synack to increase trust in security findings. Existing tools were missing too many actionable findings. The retailer saw a 20X increase in vulnerabilities discovered after switching to continuous Synack testing.

Read customer story

Continuous testing in CI/CD

Spectro Cloud used Synack’s PTaaS to integrate testing into fast-moving DevOps processes across its SDLC. Synack enabled ongoing vulnerability assessment tied directly to deployments. 

Read customer story

Frequently Asked Questions about Automating Pen Testing

How frequently should automated penetration tests be scheduled and executed for optimal security posture?

The optimal frequency for automated penetration tests is not fixed. Each organization should determine the frequency of automated penetration testing based on its risk profile, development velocity, and asset criticality. Synack recommends continuous automated penetration testing rather than point-in-time testing. 

How do AI and machine learning (ML) enhance automated penetration testing capabilities?

AI and machine learning transform automated penetration testing from simple, signature-based scanning into an adaptive, continuous, and intelligent process that is highly accurate and scalable. 

Several examples of how AI and ML are used to enhance automated pen testing are:

• Advanced asset discovery—Machine algorithms analyze vast amounts of data to identify all internet-facing assets and build a comprehensive target profile.
• Target prioritization—AI correlates disparate pieces of information to map the most probable attack paths an adversary would take. 
• Agentic AI for workflow—PTaaS platforms, like Synack, use Agentic AI to automate the pen-test workflow.  

• False positive reduction—ML models are trained on real-world patterns, enabling them to develop a contextual understanding of the target system and distinguish between harmless anomalies and threats. 
• Context-aware testing (DAST)—AI-powered DAST tools dynamically adjust their attack simulations based on real-time responses from the application. 
• Exploit validation—In platforms like Synack, the AI/ML layer automatically assesses the exploitability of a vulnerability by generating and executing exploit code to confirm the finding is real before escalating it.

• Autonomous exploit chaining—Using reinforcement learning (RL), an AI agent can learn through trial and error within a test environment. 
• Detecting novel threats—ML algorithms are adept at identifying subtle anomalies and complex patterns that deviate from normal system behavior to identify novel vulnerabilities before they have known signatures. 
• Adaptive payload generation—AI can dynamically generate new, unique payloads that are optimized to bypass the target’s specific input validation and
• Risk-based prioritization—ML models analyze not just the vulnerability’s static CVSS score, but also environmental factors, such as asset criticality and exploit availability.
• Automated remediation guidance—AI-powered SAST tools can analyze the vulnerable code and use large language models (LLMs) to generate contextual remediation suggestions.

What is the role of vulnerability management platforms in enhancing automated penetration testing results?

The primary role of vulnerability management (VM) platforms in enhancing automated penetration testing is to transform raw, technical findings into actionable, risk-prioritized intelligence and integrate the security workflow into the broader IT and development ecosystem. Used together, automated penetration testing systems find the security holes, and vulnerability management platforms ensure those holes are systematically fixed in the correct order.

What are the legal and ethical considerations for automated penetration testing?

All automated penetration testing programs must account for potential legal and ethical issues, including the following.

• Legal considerations:
  • Authorization 
  • Scope
  • Compliance with regulations
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Liability for negative outcomes
• Ethical considerations:
  • Exploitation for personal gain
  • Disruption—service interruption, system crashes, and data loss
  • Disclosure responsibility
  • Methodology transparency
  • Bias in training data

How should I measure ROI and the effectiveness of an automated penetration testing program (KPIs and metrics)?

Measuring the return on investment (ROI) and the effectiveness of an automated penetration testing program requires aligning security metrics with business risk reduction and operational efficiency gains. 

Several Synack customer stories demonstrate the results achieved with automated penetration testing. For example, a Global Retailer increased the number of vulnerabilities discovered by 20X with Synack. Read the story. Other metrics to track to quantify automated pen testing results include:

• Cost of fixes—early vs. late
• Fix rate
• Compliance savings
• Avoided losses
• Mean time to discover (MTTD)
• Mean time to resolution (MTTR)
• Vulnerabilities resolved within SLA
• Vulnerability recurrence rate
• False positive rate
• Attack surface coverage ratio

What frameworks and libraries are available for automating API penetration testing?

The available frameworks and libraries fall into two main categories: 

1. Security-focused tools—designed for adversarial testing, such as:
   • Dynamic scanners
   • Exploitation and fuzzing frameworks
2. Developer/QA-focused libraries—leveraged for security automation, such as:
   • Behavior-driven development frameworks
   • Language-specific libraries
   • API clients with automation features