Side-by-side
What each tool really finds (and misses)
| Vulnerability | SAST | DAST | SCA |
|---|---|---|---|
| SQL Injection | ✅ | ✅ | — |
| XSS | ⚠️ | ✅ | — |
| Broken Authentication | — | ✅ | — |
| IDOR / Broken Access Control | — | ✅ | — |
| Hardcoded secrets | ✅ | — | — |
| Log4Shell (CVE-2021-44228) | — | ⚠️ | ✅ |
| Vulnerable transitive dep | — | — | ✅ |
| Incompatible license (GPL) | — | — | ✅ |
| Insecure deserialization | ✅ | ⚠️ | — |
| Business logic flaw | — | ⚠️ | — |
✅ detects · ⚠️ partial detection · — blind spot
Conclusion: No single tool covers 100%. Using only SAST leaves logic flaws exposed. Using only DAST misses hardcoded secrets. Using only SCA misses your own code. You need the three layers.
Recommended tooling
