What do current users say about the false positive rate in automated vulnerability scanning tools used inside CI CD pipelines for modern web development shops?
Download run
Fan-out diagram
The searches the AI actually ran for this prompt.
SEED QUERY
What do current users say about the false positive rate in automated vulnerability scanning tools used inside CI CD pipelines for modern web development shops?
2 real searches · 1 real-search pass
Badge and edge weight = share of passes that produced the query. Hover a query for its intent and routing format.
Query classes
Google's semantic query class for every sub-query: what kind of answer each search is after, simulated vs real.
Classifying 2 queries…
Searches and sources
ChatGPT2 real searches · gpt-6
2025 2026 developer experiences false positives SAST DAST dependency vulnerability scanners CI CD pipeline Reddit GitHub discussions Google ↗
2025 2026 false positive rate automated security scanning CI pipeline Snyk Semgrep CodeQL Trivy user experience Google ↗
- Developer Survey: Security Friction in the SDLC · safeguard.sh
- Ensuring continuous security in CI/CD pipelines through LLM-assisted reduction of false positives in static analysis | Terro | International Journal of Open Information Technologies · injoit.org
- Semgrep · semgrep.dev
- r/devops discussion on CVE scanner noise · reddit.com
- r/webdev discussion on developer trust · reddit.com
Queries
2 queries · click a column to sort
| Query / type | Search | Intent | Query class | Routing format | Cluster | Freq ↓ | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2025 2026 developer experiences false positives SAST DAST dependency vulnerability scanners CI CD pipeline Reddit GitHub discussions OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | — | — | — | 1x of 1 | |
2025 2026 false positive rate automated security scanning CI pipeline Snyk Semgrep CodeQL Trivy user experience OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | — | — | — | 1x of 1 |