Now onboarding design partners

Proof, not alerts.Inside your walls.

Sprino spins up autonomous security researchers inside your own environment. They turn private source code and existing scanner findings into reproduced exploits, verified fixes, regression tests and a signed evidence receipt. Your code never leaves.

Request an assessment See how it works

Runs in your VPC, Kubernetes cluster or air-gapped network. Works before a running target exists.

Verification is the bottleneck

AI made code and findings abundant. What stayed scarce is the senior review it takes to prove which findings are exploitable, fix them without breaking the application, and make sure they never come back. Authorization, tenant-isolation and business-logic flaws look like false positives until someone reproduces them. Most teams cannot afford to reproduce many.

Candidate overload

Findings arrive faster than senior engineers can investigate them

Hidden severity

The flaws that expose another customer's data resemble noise until they are reproduced

Manual investigation

Deep review needs scarce AppSec expertise and a working build of the right code path

Boundary constraints

Sensitive source, identity configuration and test data often cannot be sent to a hosted AI service

Sprino exists for the work that starts after detection.

findings

All candidates142
Proven0
Rejected0

142 candidates

Illustrative output

TenantIsolationTest.java

1@Test
2void tenantCannotReadAnotherTenantsOrder() {
3  var ctx = asTenant("tenant-a");
4  var order = ordersOf("tenant-b").first();
5  assertThrows(AccessDenied.class,
6    () -> orderService.getOrder(ctx, order.id()));
7}

terminal

Illustrative output

A failing test, a patch and proof

Every confirmed finding arrives in your CI as a fail-to-pass test, with a minimal root-cause patch as a reviewable pull request, and a signed receipt that records what ran, what was proved and who approved it. Unconfirmed hypotheses are never promoted to proof.

Each Sprino finding includes

The confirmed vulnerability, not a probability score
The attack path, showing how it is actually reached
The affected code, with exact lines and data flow
Reproducible evidence from an isolated sandbox execution
Severity and reachability, ranked against real exposure
A minimal patch that fixes the root cause, opened as a pull request
A security regression test that fails before the fix and passes after it
A signed receipt with hashes, logs, approvals and provenance

What most AI scanners return

Probabilistic guesses. No proof of exploitability. Engineers left to triage alone.

What Sprino returns

A reproduced exploit, a verified fix, a test that keeps it fixed, and a receipt you can hand to an auditor.

From source code to a signed receipt

Keep your daily scanners. When a release carries real risk, Sprino goes deep: it understands the application, ranks the candidate attack paths, rebuilds only the security-relevant path in a sandbox you control, proves or rejects each hypothesis, fixes what is real, retests, and returns evidence in the formats your team already uses.

Understand

Map entry points, identities, permissions, tenant boundaries, data flows and your existing scanner findings

You receiveApplication threat model

Hypothesize

Combine deterministic program analysis with your approved models and specialized security roles to rank candidate attack paths

You receiveRanked candidate paths

Build safely

Import your approved CI recipe, images, dependency cache and fixtures, including the seeded tenants and authenticated sessions an authorization exploit requires. Reconstruct only the security-relevant path inside a hostile-repository sandbox. Fail closed unless a clean replay is verified

You receiveReproducible build manifest derived from your CI

Prove or reject

Attempt exploitation under fixed permissions, budgets and signed rules of engagement. A separate verifier checks the result independently

You receiveEvidence grade and proof log

Fix

Generate a minimal root-cause patch and a security regression test

You receiveReviewable pull request and test

Retest

Confirm the exploit succeeds before the patch, fails after it, and your application tests still pass

You receiveFail-to-pass execution record

Return evidence

Package SARIF, reproduction steps, logs, hashes, approvals and provenance into a signed bundle and return it through your SCM, ASPM or ticketing system

You receiveSigned proof receipt

01
Understand
Map entry points, identities, permissions, tenant boundaries, data flows and your existing scanner findings
You receiveApplication threat model
02
Hypothesize
Combine deterministic program analysis with your approved models and specialized security roles to rank candidate attack paths
You receiveRanked candidate paths
03
Build safely
Import your approved CI recipe, images, dependency cache and fixtures, including the seeded tenants and authenticated sessions an authorization exploit requires. Reconstruct only the security-relevant path inside a hostile-repository sandbox. Fail closed unless a clean replay is verified
You receiveReproducible build manifest derived from your CI
04
Prove or reject
Attempt exploitation under fixed permissions, budgets and signed rules of engagement. A separate verifier checks the result independently
You receiveEvidence grade and proof log
05
Fix
Generate a minimal root-cause patch and a security regression test
You receiveReviewable pull request and test
06
Retest
Confirm the exploit succeeds before the patch, fails after it, and your application tests still pass
You receiveFail-to-pass execution record
07
Return evidence
Package SARIF, reproduction steps, logs, hashes, approvals and provenance into a signed bundle and return it through your SCM, ASPM or ticketing system
You receiveSigned proof receipt

Two speeds, one proof system

Sprino does not replace the scanners that run on every pull request. It adds the deep lane those scanners cannot run.

Fast guardrail

Runs on every pull request
Your existing deterministic scanners, policies and cached code graph
Inexpensive triage that routes risk to the deep lane
Promise: low latency and broad continuous coverage

Deep assurance

Runs on important releases, quarterly, or when a risk signal triggers it
Multi-engine hunt, isolated build, dynamic proof, independent verification, patch and retest
Target turnaround inside your release window (24 hours or less for a deep run)
Promise: a high-confidence outcome and an evidence receipt

Built to run inside your boundary

Regulated teams cannot send source, build artifacts or identity configuration to a hosted service. Sprino deploys into your VPC, your Kubernetes cluster or a disconnected environment, and treats everything in the repository as untrusted.

Zero-egress mode

Source fragments leave the boundary only when your policy explicitly allows it, and every such event is logged

Hostile-repository sandbox

Repository hooks, build scripts, tools and agent instructions are treated as untrusted input inside ephemeral, resource-limited environments

Signed rules of engagement

Authorized scope, forbidden actions, blast-radius limits and a named approver are signed before any exploit executes

Approved-model routing

You allowlist the models by origin, license, hosting and data handling. The proof protocol is model-neutral, so the model is never the product

Signed manifests

Configuration, model, prompt, build and evidence manifests are signed for reproducibility and audit

Fail closed

If a clean replay cannot be verified, nothing is promoted to proof

attack path

Before patch: cross-tenant read reproduced

Illustrative output

Every result carries its grade

Sprino separates hypothesis generation from independent verification and labels each result by the evidence behind it. Your team always knows what was executed, what was validated by your own tests, and what remains a hypothesis.

Execution-confirmed

The exploit ran inside the sandbox against a reproducible build and produced the predicted effect. A patch and a fail-to-pass test are attached

Independently validated

A CI or security test derived from your own fixtures demonstrates the flaw without a full exploit execution. Clearly labeled as test evidence, not execution

Unconfirmed hypothesis

A plausible path that could not be reproduced within budget or scope. Reported for your judgment, never promoted to proof

Plugs into what you already run

Sprino consumes the findings your scanners already produce and returns evidence to the systems your team already works in. No new dashboard.

Findings in

CodeQL
Semgrep
Snyk
Checkmarx
Qwiet
Any SARIF source

Source and CI

GitHub
GitLab (including self-managed)
Bitbucket
Azure DevOps
Your approved CI images and fixtures

Evidence out

SARIF
Pull requests
Jira
Webhooks and APIs
ASPM and PTaaS feeds

Product names belong to their respective owners. Listing indicates supported input or output formats, not partnership or endorsement.

Built first for regulated, multi-tenant software

Sprino starts where proof is valuable, measurable and hard to outsource: cross-service authorization and tenant-isolation assurance for important releases. First stacks are Java and .NET, with more to follow.

If you are an AI-native company shipping fast without an AppSec team, Sprino can still be a fit. Tell us your stack in the request form.

You are a strong fit if

You ship a multi-tenant B2B product with complex identities, permissions and service boundaries
You have roughly 100 to 1,500 developers and a small AppSec team
You run GitLab, Azure DevOps, Bitbucket or GitHub with strict source-residency or network-egress controls
You already pay for SAST and SCA and still carry a costly manual validation and remediation queue
Your CI already has integration tests that authenticate users, or you can seed test tenants
You need release-level assurance you can show to auditors, customers or your board

How Sprino compares to your alternatives

Sprino complements the systems that own your repositories, pipelines and findings. The table shows where it differs from the other ways to get release assurance. Columns describe categories, not any single vendor.

How Sprino compares to your alternatives
	AI code scanners Hosted or self-managed products that reason over a repository to find and describe flaws	Autonomous pentest and PTaaS Services that attack a deployed application, sometimes with human researchers	Consultancy code review A firm runs AI-assisted analysis and human validation on an export of your code	Build it yourself An internal pipeline assembled from open harnesses, scanners and model APIs	Sprino A verification layer deployed inside your environment
Works from private source before a running target exists	YesReads the repository	NoNeeds a deployed target	YesUsually on an exported copy	Yes	YesSource only, no stable target required
Reproduces the exploit in an isolated sandbox	VariesMost reason about exploitability without executing	YesAgainst the live application	PartialManual validation of a fixed top-N	VariesDepends on what you build	YesIsolated build and execution, fail closed
Source, models and execution stay inside your boundary	VariesSome offer self-hosted or air-gapped tiers; many are hosted	NoTypically hosted; source rarely involved	NoCode export or vendor access is common	Yes	YesVPC, Kubernetes or disconnected, with zero-egress mode
Hunter and verifier are separated	PartialSome run a validation pass	PartialValidators exist in some platforms	PartialHuman validation after scanning	Varies	YesIndependent verifier, graded evidence
Evidence graded by what was actually executed	NoConfidence scores or severity labels	PartialProof of exploitation, no test grade	NoReport ratings	Varies	YesExecution-confirmed, independently validated, unconfirmed
Verified patch with retest	PartialAutofix without execution retest is common	NoFindings, not fixes	NoRecommendations	Varies	YesExploit fails after, application tests pass
Leaves a reusable security regression test	No	No	No	Varies	YesFail-to-pass test lands in your CI
Signed, reproducible evidence receipt	No	PartialReports and proof artifacts	PartialReport	Varies	YesHashes, logs, approvals, provenance
Bring your own approved models	VariesOften fixed to the vendor's models	No	NoVendor's models	Yes	YesCustomer allowlist, model-neutral protocol
Consumes your existing scanner findings	PartialSome ingest SARIF	No	Partial	Yes	YesSARIF in from CodeQL, Semgrep, Snyk, Checkmarx, Qwiet
Pricing basis	Seats, repositories or scans	Per test or subscription	Per million lines plus expert days	Engineering time and model spend	Fixed-scope outcome with capped compute
Time to first verified result	Hours to days	Days to weeks	Weeks	Months to build and maintain	Inside a release window; deep run target 24 hours or less

Works from private source before a running target exists

Sprino: YesSource only, no stable target required
AI code scanners: YesReads the repository
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: NoNeeds a deployed target
Consultancy code review: YesUsually on an exported copy
Build it yourself: Yes

Reproduces the exploit in an isolated sandbox

Sprino: YesIsolated build and execution, fail closed
AI code scanners: VariesMost reason about exploitability without executing
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: YesAgainst the live application
Consultancy code review: PartialManual validation of a fixed top-N
Build it yourself: VariesDepends on what you build

Source, models and execution stay inside your boundary

Sprino: YesVPC, Kubernetes or disconnected, with zero-egress mode
AI code scanners: VariesSome offer self-hosted or air-gapped tiers; many are hosted
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: NoTypically hosted; source rarely involved
Consultancy code review: NoCode export or vendor access is common
Build it yourself: Yes

Hunter and verifier are separated

Sprino: YesIndependent verifier, graded evidence
AI code scanners: PartialSome run a validation pass
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: PartialValidators exist in some platforms
Consultancy code review: PartialHuman validation after scanning
Build it yourself: Varies

Evidence graded by what was actually executed

Sprino: YesExecution-confirmed, independently validated, unconfirmed
AI code scanners: NoConfidence scores or severity labels
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: PartialProof of exploitation, no test grade
Consultancy code review: NoReport ratings
Build it yourself: Varies

Verified patch with retest

Sprino: YesExploit fails after, application tests pass
AI code scanners: PartialAutofix without execution retest is common
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: NoFindings, not fixes
Consultancy code review: NoRecommendations
Build it yourself: Varies

Leaves a reusable security regression test

Sprino: YesFail-to-pass test lands in your CI
AI code scanners: No
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: No
Consultancy code review: No
Build it yourself: Varies

Signed, reproducible evidence receipt

Sprino: YesHashes, logs, approvals, provenance
AI code scanners: No
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: PartialReports and proof artifacts
Consultancy code review: PartialReport
Build it yourself: Varies

Bring your own approved models

Sprino: YesCustomer allowlist, model-neutral protocol
AI code scanners: VariesOften fixed to the vendor's models
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: No
Consultancy code review: NoVendor's models
Build it yourself: Yes

Consumes your existing scanner findings

Sprino: YesSARIF in from CodeQL, Semgrep, Snyk, Checkmarx, Qwiet
AI code scanners: PartialSome ingest SARIF
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: No
Consultancy code review: Partial
Build it yourself: Yes

Pricing basis

Sprino: Fixed-scope outcome with capped compute
AI code scanners: Seats, repositories or scans
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: Per test or subscription
Consultancy code review: Per million lines plus expert days
Build it yourself: Engineering time and model spend

Time to first verified result

Sprino: Inside a release window; deep run target 24 hours or less
AI code scanners: Hours to days
Autonomous pentest and PTaaS: Days to weeks
Consultancy code review: Weeks
Build it yourself: Months to build and maintain

Category descriptions reflect publicly documented behavior of common products in each category as of September 2026 and will vary by vendor and plan. Verify against the vendor you are evaluating.

Now onboarding three design partners

Sprino is in its founding validation sprint. We are working with a small number of regulated product teams that have a real release, a named budget owner and CI fixtures we can build on. Design partners shape the proof contract and get the first assessments at partner terms.

What you get

A fixed-budget blind comparison: your existing scanner and the best direct alternative run against the same targets as Sprino
Independently reviewed exploit evidence, patches, regression tests and signed receipts for one high-risk application
Adjudicated results you can use internally, whichever way they come out
Direct input into scope, evidence grading and integrations

What we ask

One important application or release in Java or .NET
A named economic buyer and a daily AppSec contact
Access to your approved CI recipe, images and test fixtures inside your environment
Honest feedback, including where Sprino falls short

Apply as a design partner

Notes on verification

Short essays on proving exploitability, grading evidence and running security research inside a customer boundary.

All posts

September 8, 20265 min read

Questions security teams ask first

Give us one release. We return proof.

Tell us about your application and constraints. We reply within two business days with scope, price and a deployment plan.

Proof, not alerts.Inside your walls.

Verification is the bottleneck

Candidate overload

Hidden severity

Manual investigation

Boundary constraints

A failing test, a patch and proof

Each Sprino finding includes

From source code to a signed receipt

Understand

Hypothesize

Build safely

Prove or reject

Fix

Retest

Return evidence

Understand

Hypothesize

Build safely

Prove or reject

Fix

Retest

Return evidence

Two speeds, one proof system

Fast guardrail

Deep assurance

Built to run inside your boundary

Zero-egress mode

Hostile-repository sandbox

Signed rules of engagement

Approved-model routing

Signed manifests

Fail closed

Every result carries its grade

Plugs into what you already run

Findings in

Source and CI

Evidence out

Built first for regulated, multi-tenant software

You are a strong fit if

How Sprino compares to your alternatives

Works from private source before a running target exists

Reproduces the exploit in an isolated sandbox

Source, models and execution stay inside your boundary

Hunter and verifier are separated

Evidence graded by what was actually executed

Verified patch with retest

Leaves a reusable security regression test

Signed, reproducible evidence receipt

Bring your own approved models

Consumes your existing scanner findings

Pricing basis

Time to first verified result

Now onboarding three design partners

What you get

What we ask

Notes on verification

Verification is the bottleneck, not detection

Three grades of evidence, and why the labels matter

Security research that never leaves your boundary

Questions security teams ask first

Does our source code leave our environment?

Does Sprino replace our SAST or SCA tools?

Do we need a deployed, running application for Sprino to work?

How do we know which results were actually proven?

What stops an exploit from causing damage inside our environment?

Which AI models does Sprino use, and can we control them?

What does a confirmed finding look like when it reaches us?

Which stacks and code hosts are supported today?

How long does a deep run take?

How do we start?

Give us one release. We return proof.