A release can introduce an exploitable issue between scheduled security assessments. Continuous AI pentesting helps teams test the running application as it changes. The useful outcome is evidence developers can act on—and a way to check that a deployed repair actually resolves the finding.
Aikido Infinite provides continuous AI pentesting alongside your existing development process. This guide explains the path from an initial assessment to a finding, developer action, and a requested retest. You can keep your current security scanners and issue-tracking process while evaluating that workflow.
Start with a scoped application and an initial assessment
Choose the application and environment you intend to test. Configure its scope and access, and complete an initial Aikido assessment. For continuous testing, connect the repositories needed to identify relevant changes and check the current permissions and credit requirements in the setup documentation.
Keep an initial full assessment distinct from later targeted testing. A small test of changed behavior is not a fresh assessment of every application surface.
Configure when continuous testing runs
Decide whether testing should follow a configured deployment branch or a schedule. Align that trigger with the environment Aikido can reach, including any delay needed for a deployment to finish.
The goal is to test the application state you are actually evaluating. A new commit, a deployed release, and an accessible test environment are related events, but they are not interchangeable. See Continuous Pentesting for the current configuration controls.
Follow the finding into the developer’s workflow
A useful finding gives the developer enough information to understand the affected behavior, reproduce the problem, and evaluate a repair. Aikido’s pentest overview explains the validation and finding information the product supplies.
Keep remediation ownership in the process your team already uses. For example, create or update an issue in your existing tracker with a link to the Aikido finding, the affected release, the owner, and the repair’s acceptance criteria. This can be a manual handoff. If you use an integration, verify its behavior for pentest findings before relying on it for synchronization or closure.
An illustrative repair workflow
The following example explains the process; it is not a customer case study or a measured product demonstration.
Imagine a web application that allows an authenticated user to access a record belonging to another account. A pentest finding identifies the affected operation and provides evidence of the access-control failure.
The developer investigates the authorization check and prepares a repair. The team reviews and tests that change through its normal pull-request process. A proposed patch is a candidate repair; the application’s behavior still needs to be checked after deployment.
StageWho actsWhat to recordConfirmed findingAikido supplies the finding; the team reviews it.Finding link, affected application behavior, reproduction evidence, and tested release.Developer ownershipThe team assigns the existing tracker issue.Owner and acceptance criteria: the unauthorized action must fail while permitted access still works.RepairThe developer implements and reviews the change.Pull request and the release containing the repair.DeploymentThe team deploys to the assessment environment.Environment and deployed version.VerificationAn authorized user requests a finding retest.Retest result and any remaining remediation work.
Verify the deployed repair
Deploy the repair to the assessment environment before requesting a retest. Review the result before treating the security issue as resolved. If the issue remains reproducible, continue remediation and repeat the check after the next repair.
Keep the retest evidence linked to the work item. A closed issue-tracker ticket and a successful security check answer different questions: one records workflow state; the other records what happened when the application was tested. Follow the finding-retest instructions for the current actions and result states.
What can stay in place?
Your existing SAST, SCA, and other security tools can continue to run. Your repository, review process, and tracker can remain the systems your developers use to coordinate changes. Adopting pentesting does not require moving the entire security stack to Aikido.
There is still setup work: application access, scope, repositories for continuous testing, permissions, and usage configuration. Check those requirements for the specific testing mode you choose.
Compare the right kind of repeated testing
A full assessment, a targeted test after a change, and a retest of one known finding serve different purposes. When evaluating any continuous pentesting product, ask which one is happening, what triggers it, and what evidence is returned.
A successful retest addresses the checked finding in the tested environment. It does not, by itself, establish permanent regression coverage for every future release or show that every vulnerability has been found.
Run a practical pilot
Choose one application and follow a finding through your actual development process. Record the setup effort, manual handoffs, evidence quality, and repair-verification result. If no finding is produced, do not invent one to complete the story: use an approved demonstration environment to evaluate the workflow.
Start with the Aikido pentest setup, then configure continuous testing when the initial assessment and prerequisites are in place.
