SASTAV and ARX ASPM PLATFORM Integrate Static Code Analysis with Application Security Risk Management
Russian developers ShiftLeft Security and ARX Security have ensured compatibility between the SASTAV SAST solution and the ARX ASPM PLATFORM. Static analysis of source code can now be launched and configured directly from the ASPM platform interface.
For each project, specialists can select repositories and branches, form rule sets, set scanning parameters, and establish quality gates — criteria that determine whether a product can be released with detected defects. Risk acceptance procedures are also configured within the same interface, requiring formal control rather than simple promises to fix issues.
SASTAV is responsible for static code analysis. The solution allows creation and editing of rules, assignment of different check sets to individual repositories, and management of scanning parameters. ARX ASPM PLATFORM acts as a unified center for managing AppSec tools. The platform collects results from various analyzers, correlates related findings, assesses risks, and displays the overall security posture of digital products.
Both solutions use artificial intelligence, but at different stages. In SASTAV, AI participates in defect verification, automatic triage, prioritization, and preparation of code change recommendations. This reduces the volume of raw warnings passed downstream. The AI assistant in ARX ASPM PLATFORM determines the statuses of defects found by the platform or imported from external systems.
After integration, a two-tier scheme emerges: SASTAV examines the code and filters findings, while ARX correlates them with results from other tools and helps decide which risks are acceptable. Developers expect to reduce manual operations, accelerate DevSecOps project connections, and lower the load on AppSec teams.
Related articles
Incident Reconstruction Fails When Logs Lack Time Zone Offsets and Proper Synchronization
Reconstructing security incidents from multiple log sources often collapses when timestamps lack time zone information or consistent synchronization. Events from web servers, load balancers, applications, and mail gateways can appear in physically impossible order, such as responses preceding requests or sessions closing before they open. The root causes include clock drift without NTP, mismatched reference points like UTC versus local time, and timestamps recorded at message processing rather than event occurrence. Classic BSD syslog (RFC 3164) omits both year and offset, forcing investigators to consult potentially unavailable source systems. Modern RFC 5424 provides full timestamps with offsets, making normalization possible without external context. Organizations must enforce offset-inclusive formats at ingestion, monitor actual synchronization status rather than service uptime, and document external sources whose timestamps cannot be controlled.
HTTP Methods Explained: GET, POST, PUT, PATCH, DELETE and the New QUERY Standard
HTTP methods define the actions a client requests from a server regarding a resource. The core semantics are outlined in RFC 9110, with extensions for specialized protocols. A new standardized method called QUERY was introduced in June 2026 via RFC 10008 to handle complex queries that include a request body while remaining safe and idempotent. The article details safe and idempotent properties, compares each method including GET, HEAD, POST, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, OPTIONS, TRACE, CONNECT, and QUERY, and explains their correct usage to avoid breaking caches, proxies, and infrastructure expectations. It also covers WebDAV extensions and other registered methods in the IANA registry.
From Web Perimeter Breaches to Domain Takeover: How Standoff Hackbase Trains Pentesters on Real Corporate Infrastructure
wr3dmast3r, a senior pentester and BSCP certification guide author, rose to first place on the Standoff Hackbase ranking by shifting focus from initial perimeter access to full internal infrastructure compromise. The platform replicates large-scale corporate networks from various industries, forcing participants to map service relationships, harvest credentials, escalate privileges, and chain pivots across segments. Unlike CTF challenges that end with a single flag, Hackbase tasks require building complete attack paths that can lead to data theft, process disruption, or cross-domain movement. The interview highlights practical techniques such as time-boxing hypotheses, manually modeling infrastructure after automated scans, and using AI only as an information accelerator rather than an autonomous operator. wr3dmast3r also details a memorable chain that began with a bot, moved through VPN and Outlook access, leveraged SCCM tokens for privilege escalation, and ended with compromise of a second domain containing the target system.
OTUS Publishes September Digest of Free Lessons on Linux Administration, PostgreSQL, CI/CD and Infrastructure Security
OTUS has released a new digest listing free September webinars aimed at infrastructure engineers, DevOps specialists and system administrators. The program covers practical topics including Linux server configuration, PostgreSQL 18 performance tuning, high-availability clusters with Patroni, CI/CD pipelines in GitLab, eBPF observability and infrastructure security practices. All sessions are delivered by practicing OTUS instructors who share real-world production experience. Separate tracks address RAID and LVM management, GPO policies, release management in 1C environments, Go profiling, mitmproxy traffic analysis and responsible use of AI tools for incident investigation and code review. The webinars run throughout September at 19:00 or 20:00 Moscow time and require only free registration. The digest also includes sessions on career growth from tech lead to CTO and effective responsibility distribution for team leads.