Source Code Security
Static analysis (SAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), securing your code and its dependencies before they reach production.
Source code is where security issues are cheapest to fix and most expensive to leave. A weakness caught at commit time costs minutes to remediate; the same weakness in production costs orders of magnitude more, and may already have been exploited by the time it surfaces in a penetration test.
Vantage Point's source code security service combines static application security testing (SAST), analysing your own code, with software composition analysis (SCA), analysing the dependencies you pull in. Together they cover the full code-supply chain that ships to production.
Engagements are usually delivered as part of a secure SDLC programme, but we also run them as standalone assessments for pre-release sign-off, M&A technical due diligence, and post-acquisition codebases inherited without security history.
Fixing in code is cheaper than fixing in production.
The supply chain is part of your codebase
A typical modern application is 80–90% third-party code. SCA is the only practical way to keep that surface visible and actionable.
Static analysis surfaces what runtime testing cannot
SAST sees code paths that DAST never reaches, error handlers, batch jobs, scheduled tasks, internal admin functions. Combined they cover dramatically more attack surface.
Compliance is moving towards SSDF / SLSA
NIST SSDF and SLSA are reframing what evidence regulators and customers will expect about secure development. SAST and SCA results are core inputs to that evidence.
What we test.
SAST, static application security testing
Source-level analysis identifying weaknesses early in the SDLC, where they are cheapest to remediate.
- Authentication and authorisation logic
- Input validation and output encoding
- Session management and crypto
- Sensitive-data handling paths
- Pipeline integration where applicable
SCA, software composition analysis
Surface known-vulnerable third-party components, license-compliance risk, and supply-chain exposure across direct and transitive dependencies.
- Component inventory across the codebase
- Known vulnerabilities with exploitability triage
- License compliance and obligation analysis
- Direct and transitive dependency mapping
- Outdated or unmaintained components
The flaws engagements like this consistently surface.
Drawn from common categories our consultants surface across engagements of this type. Severity and prevalence vary by environment and maturity.
Known-vulnerable dependencies
High-severity CVEs in widely-used libraries the team did not know they were using transitively, typical of Log4Shell-style supply-chain exposure.
Insecure cryptography
Hardcoded keys, weak hashing for credentials, deprecated ciphers, ECB-mode encryption used on PII.
Injection-prone code paths
String-concatenated SQL queries, command execution with user-controlled input, deserialisation of untrusted data.
Authorisation flaws in code
Endpoints lacking role checks, business-logic paths that trust client-supplied identity, admin functions reachable without the expected guard.
Secrets and credentials in source
API keys checked into repositories, .env files in build artefacts, database credentials in configuration committed to public branches.
License & legal exposure
GPL/AGPL-licensed dependencies pulled into proprietary distribution, unclear-license code shipped to customers, missing attribution.
A structured, intelligence-led path through every engagement.
Every engagement follows the same disciplined path through the Velocity platform, so quality, traceability, and reporting are consistent across teams.
Scoping
Define assets, environments, Rules of Engagement, and acceptance criteria with the technical and security stakeholders.
Execution
Manual and tool-assisted testing by CREST-accredited consultants, with evidence captured at each step.
Validation
Every finding is reproduced, risk-rated under CVSS, and confirmed by a second consultant before reporting.
Reporting
Cryptographically signed reports with test-case traceability, severity ratings, reproduction steps, and remediation guidance.
Debrief & Retest
Stakeholder walk-through of findings, prioritisation support, and a retest cycle on remediated issues.
Mapped to recognised baselines.
Reports built for audit, engineering, and executive review.
Every engagement produces verifiable, traceable, regulator-ready artefacts, generated by Velocity and signed cryptographically.
PDF · JSON · XML · CSV · Multi-Language Reporting Supported · CVSS 3.0 / 3.1 / 4.0
- Cryptographically signed final report
- Per-finding code location and reproduction
- Severity, exploitability, and CVSS scoring
- Developer-ready remediation guidance
- Component inventory and license register
- Pipeline integration recommendations
- Retest on remediated findings
Common buyer questions.
Do you need access to our full source tree? +
For SAST, yes, within agreed Rules of Engagement and confidentiality terms. We can work on cloned repositories provided to a temporary engagement environment, or in your environment under controlled access.
Which languages and frameworks do you cover? +
All commonly-used enterprise languages, Java, .NET, JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Go, C/C++, Swift, Kotlin. Where you use less common stacks we confirm coverage during scoping.
Will you flag every SAST tool finding, or triage first? +
We triage first. Raw SAST output is noisy by nature. Findings are validated, contextualised against the application, and prioritised by exploitability before they hit the report, so engineering time goes to issues that actually matter.
Catch flaws where they are cheapest to fix.
Speak to a consultant about scoping SAST, SCA, or a combined source code security programme.