What criteria matter most when evaluating application security testing tools for a pipeline that uses GitHub Actions
Download run
Fan-out diagram
The searches the AI actually ran for this prompt.
SEED QUERY
What criteria matter most when evaluating application security testing tools for a pipeline that uses GitHub Actions
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.
ChatGPT real searches (2)
Classes come from the query-classifier (a local Laya model). 2 of 2 calls are low-confidence (under 50%) — hover a query in the table to see its confidence.
Searches and sources
ChatGPT2 real searches · gpt-6
GitHub Actions security code scanning SARIF integration workflow documentation SAST DAST dependency review 2026 Google ↗
OWASP application security testing tools evaluation criteria false positives CI CD pipeline developer workflow Google ↗
- OWASP DevSecOps Guideline · owasp.org
- WSTG - Latest · owasp.github.io
- www-project-security-culture/stable/7-Security_Testing/index.md at main · OWASP/www-project-security-culture · github.com
- Static Application Security Testing (SAST) · owasp.github.io
- Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) · owasp.github.io
Queries
2 queries · click a column to sort
| Query / type | Search | Intent | Query class | Routing format | Cluster | Freq ↓ | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GitHub Actions security code scanning SARIF integration workflow documentation SAST DAST dependency review 2026 OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | Reason | — | — | 1x of 1 | |
OWASP application security testing tools evaluation criteria false positives CI CD pipeline developer workflow OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | Reason | — | — | 1x of 1 |