Too many vulnerabilities? Prioritize the few that matter.
Scanners give you a long list sorted by severity. Eureka threat-models your code and finds which vulnerabilities an attacker could chain together. Those go to the top. Autofix writes the fix and opens a pull request. You review and merge.
Severity-sorted lists do not show how findings could connect.
A vulnerability list does not answer every question about your application
A scanner can tell you what exists. It does not always show how findings could connect, what an attacker would need or what could be affected in your application.
- Scanner findings are scattered across tools, exports, and dashboards
- A finding’s severity does not answer every application-specific question
- A lower-severity finding may deserve closer attention when it contributes to an attack scenario.
- Connected weaknesses can create concerns that a single severity score does not show
- Your team can spend time on the longest list instead of the findings that most deserve attention
Attackers do not stop at individual vulnerabilities
Once attackers gain an initial foothold, they look for connected weaknesses that let them move deeper: exposed entry points, vulnerable dependencies, leaked secrets, weak controls and workflow gaps.
Eureka uses AI agents to threat-model your code and builds attack scenarios from your findings: where an attacker starts, which vulnerabilities they chain, and what they could reach.
Priority comes from context
Severity is one input. Your application’s context helps decide which findings deserve attention first.
Vulnerabilities are not equal
A lower-severity issue may become critical when it connects to a larger attack scenario.
Scenarios show the connections
Inspect the conditions, linked findings and potential consequences a modeled scenario describes.
Decide with the team
Developer assessment of the conditions and potential impact informs urgency and the next action.
“It's highlighting things that we've ignored in the past. Over time, individually, these things we're like, well, that's not a big deal, that's not exploitable… but now maybe they are in this chain.”
Severity, source and workflow status from the scanners you use.
Developers inspect the conditions, linked findings and potential impact.
Decisions and remediation activity stay connected to the finding record.
High severity is not always high risk. A lower-severity issue can deserve more attention when it contributes to a scenario with serious potential impact.
Why severity scores fall short
Scanner severity is useful, but it is only one signal. A critical finding may be lower priority if it does not create meaningful risk in your application. A lower-severity finding may deserve closer attention when it contributes to an attack scenario.
"Severity is a property of the vulnerability. Risk is a property of the business. Most reports conflate the two."
Built by leaders behind the OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS) and Secure Pipeline Verification Standard (SPVS).
Severity signal
Shows how serious a finding looks on its own, before any application context.
Business context
Shows whether the finding affects the systems, users, data, or workflows that matter.
Conditions and potential impact
Shows what an attacker would need and what could be affected if a scenario played out.
Attack scenario context
Shows how the finding could connect to other weaknesses in a modeled attack scenario.
Related thinking: Security design reviews, threat modeling and business context are key inputs when scanner severity alone does not show what to fix first.
From severity scores to informed priority
Severity is the starting point. Attack scenarios add conditions, connections and potential consequences for developers to assess, and decisions stay connected to the finding record.
Eureka scans your code
Eureka Managed Scans runs SAST, SCA and secrets scanning on your repositories and collects every finding.
Eureka finds the attack scenarios
Eureka threat-models your application and chains vulnerabilities into attack scenarios.
Eureka ranks what to fix first
Every attack scenario gets a score. The higher it is, the more likely it can be exploited. Fix those first.
Eureka writes the fix
Click Autofix on a finding in a GitHub repository. The agent writes the fix, scans again to check the vulnerability is gone, and opens a pull request.
You review and merge
Review the pull request and merge it. Eureka keeps the audit history: what was found, what changed and who approved it.
See what actually creates application risk
Follow a finding from scenario context to a recorded team decision and into remediation.
Scenario context
Inspect the conditions, linked findings and potential impact.
- 01Finding
- 02Associated scenario
- 03Conditions and impact
AI does not change what matters.
It changes how quickly threat actors find and exploit weaknesses.
AI-assisted vulnerability discovery is increasing the speed and volume of findings. Anthropic Mythos is an early signal of what security teams should expect next: more vulnerability discovery, faster pressure to patch and larger backlogs that still demand context before anyone knows what to fix first.
More findings, less time
AI-assisted discovery compresses the window between vulnerability discovery, disclosure, pressure to patch, and customer scrutiny.
More output does not mean better decisions
Scanner volume is harder to manage when your team lacks the context to decide what deserves attention.
The defensible response is prioritization
Your team needs context to decide what matters and a decision record that is preserved as work happens.
Integrate with the tools you already trust.
Fix what matters first.
Your team may already use Snyk, GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep, Veracode, SonarQube or other scanners. Eureka does not need to become another disconnected dashboard. It helps turn scanner findings into scenario-informed prioritization, remediation tracking and audit history.
Built-in checks
Start with Eureka-supported coverage for code, secrets, and supply chain so your team can create an application security baseline.
Existing scanner output
Bring findings from the tools your team already uses, where supported, instead of managing fragmented outputs across separate dashboards, and reports.
Attack-scenario context
Inspect how findings could connect, the conditions an attacker would need and what could be affected.
One workflow
Move from scattered reports to prioritized action, remediation tracking, decision history, and audit history.
Act on the finding.
Keep the proof.
Prioritization only matters if your team can act on it and show what changed. Eureka keeps the record of each finding, decision and remediation step, so your team can show which risks were handled and which were accepted.
Attack scenario record
Show which findings were connected in a scenario, how your team assessed it and what work followed.
Remediation history
Track what was fixed, when it changed, and whether the finding was validated or reopened.
Decision trail
Capture accepted, deferred, or approved risk with the context attached to the finding.
Clearer record for review
Give customers, auditors, or reviewers a clear record of what was found, handled, and documented.
Frequently asked questions.
Common concerns about vulnerability prioritization and AppSec evidence.
Yes. Eureka can ingest supported scanner output and SARIF-compatible results, then normalize findings into one workflow for prioritization, remediation, and evidence.
Not usually. Eureka helps teams get more value from those tools by adding context, prioritization, workflow, and evidence on top of scanner findings.
No. Eureka can run scans, but its main value is turning scanner output into prioritized AppSec work: what matters, who owns it, what changed, what was accepted, and what evidence exists.
Eureka models attack scenarios around your findings, showing the required conditions, connected weaknesses and potential impact. Developers inspect the scenario and decide what to address. The scenario exploitability score supports that review; it is separate from the per-finding attack-path score in the vulnerability list.
Severity describes the vulnerability in isolation. Priority also depends on your application: what an attacker would need, how the finding connects to other weaknesses and what could be affected.
Eureka keeps the record of findings, priorities, decisions, owners, remediation activity, validation, approvals, and risk acceptance so teams can explain what was handled and why.
Stop guessing.
Start prioritizing with context.
Eureka helps your team move from scanner findings to scenario-informed priority, focused remediation and a clear record of what changed.
No scanner maze. No spreadsheet scramble. No guessing what happened later.