Sprita iT

How we work

Inside your workflow, not beside it

Most security programmes fail on adoption, not on detection. This page shows exactly where our analysis attaches, what a developer sees, when a gate starts blocking, and what you receive at the end.

Architecture

Where each check attaches

One analysis layer across the lifecycle, feeding a single prioritized backlog and a single audit trail. Exact connectors for your IAM, cloud and CI are validated in discovery — not assumed.

IDEDeveloperCommitGitPull requestReviewCI buildPipelineArtifactRegistryRuntimeCloud / K8sInline SASTSecure patternsSecrets scanPre-commit hookSAST + SCAPR feedbackIaC scanMalicious depsRisk gateSBOMProvenanceDAST / IASTAPI testsEVIDENCE LAYEREvery check feeds one prioritized backlog and one audit trail: what was scanned, what was found, who owns it, when it was fixed.
Where each capability attaches to your existing delivery workflow. No parallel process is introduced — connectors are confirmed for your environment during discovery.

Developer experience

What your engineers actually see

A finding is only useful if the person who can fix it understands it in seconds. Feedback lands in code review, anchored to the line, with the risk in plain language and a concrete fix — plus an honest exit for false positives.

Pull request #— · checks1 findingsrc/payments/authorize.… · line ––CRITICALCWE · OWASP ruleReachable: yesWhat is wrong, in one sentencePlain-language risk statement — no scanner jargon, no CVSS wall.Suggested fixConcrete remediation for this codebase, with the secure pattern to apply.Apply & resolveDismiss — false positiveDismissals tune the ruleset.
Illustrative schematic of the feedback format, not a product screenshot. The point: findings arrive in review, anchored to a line, with a fix and a one-click way to reject noise.

Adoption

How gates are introduced

The fastest way to kill a security programme is to block a release on day one with an untuned ruleset. We do the opposite.

1 · ObserveWeeks 1–2Nothing blocksBaseline measuredNoise catalogued2 · TuneWeeks 2–4Rules fitted to stackFalse positives removedOwners assigned3 · EnforceWeek 4 onwardAgreed classes blockEverything else warnsExceptions documentedNo gate blocks a release until your team has seen its output and agreed to it.
Gate adoption is progressive by design — the answer to “will this stop our releases?” is that you decide when, and for what.

Engagement

The service cycle

  1. 01

    Analysis & criteria tuning

    Scope, stack and compliance context; analysis criteria adjusted to your environment. NDA available before any code access.

  2. 02

    Diagnosis & risk prioritization

    Findings presented with business-impact classification and a unified risk index (0–100) for leadership.

  3. 03

    Action plan & remediation map

    A traceable, prioritized remediation map ordered by security return on investment.

  4. 04

    Re-analysis & validation

    Improvements re-analyzed and validated, with a 90-day window included in the standard cycle.

Output

What you receive

Every engagement produces evidence a technical team can act on and an auditor can read.

1

Executive summary

Risk index 0–100, top exposures, decision points

2

Findings register

Each issue: location, rule, severity, exploitability, owner

3

Prioritized remediation map

Ordered by security return on effort, with estimates

4

Maintainability report

ISO/IEC 25000 metrics and technical-debt cost

5

Dependency & licence inventory

SBOM (CycloneDX / SPDX) and legal risk

6

Control narrative

Method, scope and coverage — written for auditors

Structure of an assessment package. Contents are produced from your codebase — we do not publish sample client reports, and any redacted example is shared under NDA during discovery.

Frequently asked questions

Will this slow down our releases?

Not by design. Analysis runs inside the pipelines and pull requests you already have, and gates are introduced in three phases: observe (nothing blocks), tune (rules fitted to your stack, false positives removed), enforce (only the risk classes your team agreed on). You decide when a gate starts blocking and for what.

How much extra work does this create for developers?

The target is none beyond fixing real issues. Findings appear in code review anchored to the exact line, with a concrete fix and a one-click path to dismiss a false positive — and dismissals feed back into rule tuning, so noise decreases over time rather than accumulating.

Can we see a sample report before engaging?

We do not publish client reports, even redacted, on a public site. During discovery we walk through the structure of a deliverable and can share a redacted example under NDA.

Do you need access to our source code?

For static analysis, yes — and an NDA is available before any access. Analysis can also run entirely inside your environment (on-premise), so source code never leaves your control. Runtime testing (DAST) needs no source access at all.

What do you need from our team to start?

A scoping conversation, read access to the repositories in scope (or an on-premise deployment), and a named technical counterpart. Everything else — connectors, rulesets, gate policy — is configured by us and confirmed with your team.

Want the technical detail for a specific module? See the solutions portfolio.

Bring us a repository and a deadline

The fastest way to judge this is to watch us scope your real problem. NDA available before any code access.

Request a security assessmentExplore our solutions