Application Security has come a long way. Tools like SAST, DAST, SCA, and WAF/WAAP have served the industry well—helping organizations identify flaws in code, test for vulnerabilities, and block attacks at the edge. But while they were built for the challenges of the past, they’re struggling to keep up with the demands of modern software development and evolving threats.
Here’s why traditional AppSec tools are reaching their limits—and what that means for security teams today.
1. No Visibility into the Real Running Application
Traditional approaches often fail to see the application as it truly runs.
- SAST and SCA work on static code or component analysis. They never see how code behaves in production—where logic actually executes and vulnerabilities can be exploited. Instead, they guess at risk based on code structure or dependency lists.
- DAST and WAF/WAAP, meanwhile, observe live traffic but lack any understanding of the application’s underlying code, architecture, or logic.
All of these tools also have minimal visibility into modern APIs, leaving critical attack surfaces exposed. The result? Fragmented, incomplete security coverage that can't account for real-world behavior.
2. Intermittent Protection
Applications today face relentless, continuous attacks—but most traditional tools only work in bursts.
- SAST, SCA, and DAST are fundamentally scanners. They run on-demand or on a schedule—often days or weeks apart. Between scans, new vulnerabilities or changes go unmonitored and unprotected.
- WAF/WAAP offers continuous traffic monitoring, but with limited application awareness or context.
Without always-on, in-depth observability, security teams are left blind to what happens between those scan windows.
3. Fragmented Coverage Across the DevOps Lifecycle
Modern security must span the entire DevOps lifecycle—from code to production. But traditional tools are siloed.
- SAST, SCA, and DAST focus on development and build/test phases, with little to no operational visibility.
- WAAP operates in production but offers nothing for development.
This fragmented coverage forces DevSecOps teams to juggle multiple tools, learn different workflows, and stitch together incomplete data. Worse, there are gaps in certain phases with no meaningful protection at all.
4. Complexity That Slows Teams Down
Even when these tools are available, they’re not equally usable.
- SAST and SCA are relatively developer-friendly.
- DAST demands specialized security expertise to configure, authenticate, and tune for meaningful coverage—making it unsustainable for developers to own.
- WAF/WAAP is so complex it’s never integrated into CI/CD pipelines.
This complexity limits adoption, creates bottlenecks, and prevents security from keeping pace with rapid development cycles.
The Result: Limited Insight and Ineffective Security
Ultimately, these challenges mean traditional AppSec delivers poor visibility into what teams are actually building and deploying. Without clear observability into the real application and API behavior—its logic, architecture, vulnerabilities, and threats—DevSecOps teams are left guessing.
It’s no surprise that despite using multiple tools, many organizations still struggle to secure modern applications effectively.
In our next blog, we’ll explore emerging solutions designed to address these shortcomings—and why the future of AppSec must move beyond legacy scanning and edge monitoring.
Meanwhile, check out our previous posts on Runtime Application Security to learn how always-on, context-rich protection is changing the game.
