Free ToolBy GitIntel

SAST vs DAST vs IAST: Which Security Testing Belongs in Your Pipeline?

A practical comparison of static, dynamic, and interactive application security testing for engineering teams.

GitIntel tracks AI-generated code across your entire git history — giving every tool on this page the attribution layer that standard dev tooling misses.

GitIntel identifies which security tools are integrated into your git workflow

Application security testing splits into three categories based on when and how tests execute. Choosing the right combination depends on your pipeline, threat model, and engineering capacity.

SAST (Static Application Security Testing) analyzes source code without executing it. Semgrep is the current leader for developer-friendly SAST — it uses a pattern-matching syntax that lets teams write custom rules, runs in milliseconds per file, and integrates natively with GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, and pre-commit hooks. SonarQube covers a broader quality and security surface and is common in enterprise environments. Snyk Code uses ML-based analysis that catches vulnerability patterns Semgrep rules might miss. SAST runs fast, catches known patterns early, and integrates into the IDE. The gap: it can't see runtime behavior, third-party library interactions at runtime, or logic-level authorization bugs.

DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) attacks a running application. OWASP ZAP is the open-source standard — it proxies HTTP traffic, crawls the app, and fires payloads for SQLi, XSS, path traversal, and other injection classes. Burp Suite Professional is the commercial leader, with a richer scanner and manual testing tools that security engineers use for penetration testing. DAST finds what SAST misses (runtime configuration issues, framework-level vulnerabilities, actual exploitability) but requires a deployed environment and can generate false positives in dynamic UIs. A DAST scan against a staging environment as part of the deploy pipeline is the standard practice.

IAST (Interactive Application Security Testing) instruments the application itself — an agent runs inside the JVM, CLR, or Node.js process and monitors actual execution. Contrast Security is the dominant IAST vendor. Because it sees actual code paths executed during real test traffic (including automated test suite runs), IAST has very low false positive rates compared to SAST and DAST. The tradeoff: language support is narrower (Java, .NET, Node.js, Python, Go), and the agent adds 5-15% runtime overhead.

The practical DevSecOps pipeline: SAST in pre-commit and CI (fast, cheap, developer feedback loop), dependency scanning (Snyk OSS, Dependabot) in CI, DAST against staging on every deploy, IAST in the QA environment if your stack supports it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can Semgrep replace SonarQube?

Semgrep is faster to integrate and more developer-friendly for security-specific rules. SonarQube has a broader scope — code quality metrics, duplication detection, technical debt tracking — and a mature enterprise offering with LDAP/SAML and project-level dashboards. Teams focused on security use Semgrep; teams needing a combined quality-and-security platform tend to stay with SonarQube. Many large engineering organizations run both.

How do I run OWASP ZAP in CI/CD?

OWASP ZAP provides an official Docker image (ghcr.io/zaproxy/zaproxy) and a GitHub Action (zaproxy/action-full-scan). The baseline scan mode is passive-only, suitable for PR checks. The full-scan mode runs active attack tests and is appropriate for staging environments. Expect 5-20 minute scan times depending on application size and the attack surface.

What is software composition analysis (SCA) and is it different from SAST?

SCA analyzes your dependency tree for known vulnerabilities in third-party libraries (CVEs in the NVD database). SAST analyzes your own source code. Both are distinct and complementary. Snyk, Dependabot, and OWASP Dependency-Check are SCA tools. In a modern DevSecOps pipeline, SCA runs alongside SAST and catches a completely different vulnerability class — unpatched dependencies you didn't write.

Is IAST worth the overhead?

IAST makes sense for Java and .NET enterprise applications where accuracy matters more than scan speed, and where a 5-15% runtime overhead in QA environments is acceptable. For Node.js microservices or Go services, IAST tooling is less mature. Start with SAST and DAST; add IAST if your false positive rate from those tools is creating unacceptable noise.

Start Using GitIntel Free

Open source. No account required. Works on any git repository.