🧠 Food for thought

Implications, context, and why it matters.

Traditional penetration testing cycles miss flaws that automated attackers can exploit within hours

• Most companies still rely on episodic penetration testing (pentesting) while attackers operate at machine speed, shrinking the window from weeks to hours 1.
• Traditional Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools miss complex business-logic flaws like server-side request forgery (SSRF) that require skilled offensive techniques to uncover 2.
• Software ships continuously while security testing stays human-scale and periodic, which leaves risky blind spots in production 3.
• Novee’s proprietary AI model hits 90% accuracy on constrained web exploitation challenges (controlled tests of common web attacks) versus 65% for general-purpose models like Claude and Gemini, so purpose-trained offensive AI beats frontier large language models (LLMs) by over 55% 2.

Managed Security Service Providers can stand out by bundling continuous pentesting into managed security packages

• Established Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP) platforms such as Holm Security, a vulnerability management software vendor, include multi-tenant management with unified dashboards and automated billing to support continuous pentesting add-ons 4.
• MSSPs using platforms such as Cyrisma, a security risk management platform for service providers, integrate penetration testing as a built-in feature alongside vulnerability scanning to cut incident risk and support compliance objectives 5.
• Security service providers (such as MSSPs) shift clients from point-in-time testing to continuous validation models to support ongoing risk reduction 6.
• AI-driven pentesting is maturing, as seen with Novee raising its Series A within four months of founding 2, so early MSSP adopters can earn better margins by packaging continuous offensive security before it becomes commoditized.