SAST vs. DAST: How do they compare?
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) are two distinct methodologies for identifying security vulnerabilities in software applications. While the tools complement each other, their approach and timing differ.
SAST (white-box): Scans source code before an app runs to catch bugs early in the SDLC. Best for shifting security left to developers.
DAST (black-box): Tests live, running apps from the outside to expose real-world attack paths. Best for simulating attacker behavior and shifting security right to security teams.
SAST focuses on static code analysis, while DAST examines the dynamic behavior of a running application. Here’s a table that outlines the differences between these two security testing approaches:
| Comparison | SAST | DAST |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Static application source code | Running applications |
| Goal | Identify code-level vulnerabilities early in the development process | Uncover runtime vulnerabilities during or after deployment |
| Programming-language specific? | Yes | No |
| Key capabilities |
|
|
| Attack-vector coverage | Code vulnerabilities, including:
| Runtime vulnerabilities, including:
|
| Ideal use case |
|
|
The State of Code Security Report [2025]
SAST and DAST help catch vulnerabilities, but they don’t address insecure repository settings or secrets exposure. The State of Code Security Report 2025 found that secrets in public repos are still a major issue for 61% of organizations.
Download report
Understanding SAST
You can learn more about SAST tools and how they work in the following sections:
What is SAST?
SAST analyzes an application's source code, bytecode, or binaries to detect vulnerabilities without executing the program. Instead of looking for runtime flaws, SAST analyzes the source code to detect code patterns that lead to vulnerabilities.
How does SAST work?
SAST tools scan your codebase and identify known coding flaws by comparing code patterns against different security rulesets from vendors. They employ techniques such as pattern matching, control flow analysis, and data flow analysis to identify security issues within your code.
These tools work like code linters but focus on security rather than general coding best practices. They can also scan source files at different stages of development—early on with integrated development environment (IDE) integration or during deployment with CI/CD integration.
What are the main aspects of SAST methodology?
Modern SAST tools share several core capabilities for finding and fixing code issues early. These include the following:
Shift-left security: By performing code security assurance as early as possible in the SDLC, you can reduce security risks before deployment.
Focus on code quality: By highlighting issues directly in the source code, SAST also enhances code quality.
Policy-as-code extension: Advanced security platforms offer policy-as-code features that allow you to automate compliance checks and ensure consistent enforcement as developers write and test code.
Watch 5-minute demo
Watch the demo to learn how Wiz Code scans infrastructure as code, container images, and CI/CD pipelines to catch risks early—before they reach the cloud.
Watch now
Understanding DAST
The following sections will explain how DAST tools function and their key aspects. You'll also learn how DAST detects and validates runtime security issues and why your team should incorporate these tools into your security practices.
What is DAST?
DAST tools check for runtime vulnerabilities by testing applications in their production environment. These tools simulate real attacks to uncover weaknesses that attackers can exploit. Since DAST finds security issues at runtime, it’s very useful for strengthening defenses against real-world threats.
How does DAST work?
DAST tools work by interacting with an application at runtime to reveal deep-seated security vulnerabilities. These tools employ techniques such as input validation, where analysts send malicious input to observe how the application reacts.
Security teams can use DAST to simulate the behavior of threat actors and examine how their application responds to various attacks. This approach provides context on how hackers can compromise your system or steal data.
Modern DAST tools typically operate as standalone applications, providing an intuitive UI for configuring tests and reviewing results. They produce detailed reports on exposed security breaches and offer recommendations for remediation as well.
What are the main aspects of DAST methodology?
Here are the key aspects of modern DAST tools and methodologies:
Shift-right security: By testing an application during or after deployment, DAST tools allow you to identify existing security issues, not just potential vulnerabilities.
Attack simulation: These tools simulate real attack vectors, such as token authentication forgery or cross-site scripting.
No need for source code: DAST tools examine running applications, so they're programming-language agnostic and don’t require source code access.
Environment-specific testing: Analysts can use DAST to test applications in different environments, from staging to production, to identify environment-specific vulnerabilities.
DevOps Security Best Practices [Cheat Sheet]
In this 12 page cheat sheet we'll cover best practices in the following areas of DevOps: secure coding practices, infrastructure security, monitoring and response.
Download Cheat Sheet
How do you choose between SAST and DAST?
If your organization is going to prioritize one security testing method over the other, consider the following factors:
Security maturity
Early-stage adoption: If your team is just beginning its security journey or lacks experienced developers, start with DAST. It can find high-impact, externally visible vulnerabilities without requiring detailed knowledge of the codebase.
Continuous improvement: As your SDLC practices mature, integrate SAST tools to find flaws earlier in the development cycle. This helps your developers identify issues in their code, reduce remediation costs, and establish secure coding habits.
Hybrid approach: Mature organizations rely on both SAST and DAST. This layered approach reduces the risk of both code-level and runtime vulnerabilities, improves release quality, and supports faster remediation.
💡 Pro tip: Start with DAST if your team is new to application security. As your practices mature, add SAST to catch flaws earlier and establish secure coding practices. Combine both for layered coverage.
Detection time
Early detection of critical flaws: SAST tools help identify critical vulnerabilities, like SQL injection and cross-site scripting, at their source. This practice ensures that developers don’t push flawed code into the CI/CD pipeline, where remediation is slower and more costly.
Runtime validation: DAST tools find and validate flaws in staging or pre-production to detect issues that only surface when an app is live, such as broken authentication.
Shift-left and validate-right strategy: Combining SAST and DAST tools ensures the shortest detection window across the entire lifecycle, reducing the time and cost to fix vulnerabilities.
💡Pro tip: If you need to stop flaws before merging, use SAST. If you need to validate runtime misconfigs, use DAST. Combine SAST’s early detection (shift-left) with DAST’s live validation (validate-right) for continuous security coverage.
Resources and budget
Lean adoption plan: If resources are limited, start with SAST. These tools are cost-effective, integrate directly into IDEs, and open-source SAST tools offer a low-overhead entry point.
Accuracy-focused testing: As your security budget increases, invest in DAST. These tools deliver more accurate results and reduce the time security teams spend on false positives.
Integrated platform approach: Organizations should aim to combine both SAST and DAST within an integrated application security posture management platform. This approach simplifies workflows from detection to remediation, providing a unified view of risks across both code and runtime environments.
💡Pro tip: Start cheap with open-source SAST. Add DAST later when accuracy and runtime validation become critical.
Scalability
Developer adoption at scale: Adopting SAST helps organizations scale security practices across multiple projects with similar technology stacks. That’s because these tools enforce consistent, secure coding standards as part of the developer's workflows.
Application-type scalability: When you need to secure different kinds of applications that use different languages and frameworks, DAST tools are more effective because they’re language-agnostic and test applications in their running state.
💡Pro tip: Use SAST to scale secure coding practices across multiple projects with similar tech stacks. Add DAST when you need to secure diverse applications across different languages and frameworks.
Application knowledge
In-house development: If your team develops an app internally and has deep knowledge of the codebase, SAST is the ideal choice. These tools provide early insights into security flaws at the code level, which enables developers to fix issues before deployment.
Third-party codebases: When source code isn't available—such as with third-party applications or compiled binaries—DAST is more effective. These tools test the application from the outside, simulating how attackers would probe for vulnerabilities without requiring access to the source code.
💡 Pro tip: Use SAST when your team builds and understands the codebase internally to detect early, code-level flaws. Use DAST for third-party or closed-source apps where source code isn’t available.
Can you use SAST and DAST together?
SAST and DAST serve different purposes in the SDLC, making them stronger when combined. Together, they cover both code-level flaws and runtime vulnerabilities to provide end-to-end visibility.
Here are some feature overlaps and differences between SAST and DAST:
Overlaps
Shared standards: Both SAST and DAST rely on vulnerability databases and industry benchmarks, like the OWASP Top 10 and CWE Top 25, to classify and report issues.
Pipeline integration: You can plug both tools into CI/CD pipelines to enable continuous security testing before release.
Actionable reporting: These tools provide detailed reports of the security flaws they find and offer remediation guidance so teams can resolve them.
Differences
Testing approach: SAST analyzes source code without running the app, while DAST inspects running applications.
Accuracy versus context: SAST may trigger false positives due to limited context, while DAST identifies issues that translate to actual threats.
Required skills: SAST requires knowledge of the coding language and framework, but DAST focuses on application behavior and application security testing techniques.
Orchestrate integrated application security workflows
To maximize the value you gain from your SAST and DAST security tools, you should integrate them into unified workflows rather than running them as standalone tools. Here are some tips on how you can incorporate SAST and DAST testing methods together:
Combine scanning workflows
Unifying SAST and DAST scans ensures that teams receive complete coverage without duplicating testing efforts or missing critical issues.
🛠️ Action items:
Automate CI/CD security: Trigger all relevant security scans on every pull request to catch vulnerabilities before they progress through the pipeline.
Use a central platform: Aggregate findings from multiple scanning tools to remove duplicate alerts and prioritize the most critical issues in one place.
Secure all APIs: Use SAST and DAST together to test all APIs for undocumented endpoints and secrets in code, as well as runtime exposures like shadow or zombie APIs.
Enable dynamic test orchestration
Ensure that dynamic testing runs consistently and at the right stages to catch vulnerabilities before they reach production. By orchestrating DAST scans across build and environment stages, analysts can uncover issues that slip past code review, such as broken authentication or insecure deployments.
🛠️ Action items:
Trigger scans after builds: Configure DAST scans to automatically run after successful builds or deployments to catch issues before the app goes to production.
Test across environments: Run scans in staging, pre-production, and production mirrors to uncover environment-specific issues, like misconfigurations or regressions.
Schedule regular scans: Automate recurring DAST runs to continuously validate applications against emerging attack patterns and evolving threats.
Automate triage and remediation workflows
Reduce alert fatigue and ensure prompt remediation of critical issues by automating triage and remediation workflows. Without proper triage, teams may waste time addressing low-priority issues while critical vulnerabilities linger unaddressed. Automating the flow of security issues into developer tools with proper guidance helps fix the most crucial problems quickly.
🛠️ Action items:
Sort by priority: Automatically rank issues so developers can handle the most critical risks first.
Send alerts to devs: Push issues directly into tools like Jira, GitHub, or Slack so they reach the right owner quickly.
Add clear fixes: Include step-by-step remediation guidance to help developers resolve issues promptly.
By combining SAST and DAST testing methods, orchestrating dynamic tests, and automating triage, you can create an integrated security workflow that catches issues early, validates them, and accelerates the remediation processes. This end-to-end approach turns your SAST and DAST tools into a unified program rather than treating them as isolated tools.
Platforms like Wiz make this orchestration seamless by consolidating static and dynamic code security findings in one place, which reduces noise and allows your team to focus on developing features rather than chasing bugs.
Boost your code security with Wiz
You don't have to choose between SAST and DAST—these two approaches complement each other. SAST identifies vulnerabilities in the codebase, while DAST detects runtime issues that result from misconfigurations or unsafe security assumptions. Relying on only one testing method creates potential gaps in visibility. Combining them provides a more comprehensive strategy to protect your applications throughout the development lifecycle.
Wiz strengthens this approach with its built-in code security features, including software composition analysis, IaC scanning, CI/CD posture checks, and secret scanning. Through our partnership with Checkmarx, you can integrate SAST directly into the Wiz platform, creating a unified code to cloud security solution.
Wiz and Checkmarx’s integration combines static code analysis with cloud security, giving your team end-to-end visibility and faster remediation across the entire software lifecycle. It also provides the following benefits:
Detect vulnerabilities early: Checkmarx’s SAST scans source code in the SDLC to uncover flaws before deployment, complementing Wiz's cloud security coverage.
Gain complete visibility: A unified workflow tracks risks from code to cloud, enabling consistent security enforcement at every layer.
Streamline DevSecOps practices: Automated scans run directly in the CI/CD pipeline, reducing the time vulnerabilities remain in production.
Prioritize by context: Wiz enriches Checkmarx findings with cloud context and ranks issues based on real exploitability and business impact.
Unified dashboard: Our platform displays both application and cloud risks in one place, reducing complexity and eliminating tool sprawl.
The world’s largest enterprises rely on Wiz—including 50% of Fortune 100 companies—to detect issues early, prioritize risks, and guide developers to expedited remediation. Schedule a demo today to learn how you can leverage Wiz and Checkmarx to strengthen your code security.
Secure your cloud from code to production
Learn why CISOs at the fastest growing companies trust Wiz to accelerate secure cloud development.
