Battle card · vs Crowd PTaaS, AI pentest agents · v2
BugDazz Autonomous
Their crowd PTaaS farms your engagement out to whichever freelancer claims the job that week. BugDazz Autonomous runs the same surface, every commit, on the same CREST CRT bench end to end. Same testers, full year, deterministic engine, not a marketplace.
Top 3 features
- 01
Same CREST CRT bench, full year
Crowd PTaaS rotates testers per engagement; BugDazz keeps the bench static. Discovery: "How often does the lead tester change between your annual cycles?"
- 02
Diff-aware, per-commit attacks
DAST scans the deployed binary; we attack the commit. Trap question: "How would you know if last Tuesday's auth refactor opened a new IDOR before it shipped?"
- 03
Human review on every confirmed finding
Pure-AI pentest agents push raw model output to your Jira; we gate findings through a CREST CRT pentester first. Redirect: "Their agent's confidence score is not a CVSS, ours ships CVSS + reproduction + fix."
Top 3 benefits
- +
Annual snapshot becomes per-deploy
Manual pentest fires once a year; BugDazz fires on every PR. Discovery: "When did your last pentest finish? How much code has shipped since?"
- +
Re-test verification, not just discovery
Crowd PTaaS bills per re-test as a new engagement; BugDazz re-verifies inside the subscription. Redirect: "Their per-re-test fee makes teams skip verification. Ours closes the loop on every finding."
- +
CERT-In sign-off on the same engine
Specialist auditor handles CERT-In separately; BugDazz delivers signed report in 10 business days on the same run. Discovery: "How are you handling CERT-In sign-off across RBI/SEBI/IRDAI scope today?"
If they say…
“"Your platform sounds like just another scanner with marketing."”
→ Fair concern, a lot of vendors slap 'autonomous' on a Burp wrapper. Two things are different. First, every confirmed finding goes through a CREST CRT pentester before it reaches your queue. What you see is reviewed exploit, not raw scanner output. Second, the engine runs stateful, authenticated, multi-step attack chains (chained IDOR, business-logic bypass, auth escalation) that signature-based scanners can't model. Happy to send a sample finding from a current customer so you can compare against what your current tool surfaces.
“"We already use a crowd PTaaS platform, what makes you different?"”
→ Their crowd model has real strengths, large tester pool, fast turnaround for narrow scopes. The trade-off you're carrying is bench rotation. The researcher who tested your app in Q1 isn't the one who re-tests in Q3, so contextual knowledge resets each engagement. BugDazz staffs the same CREST CRT bench across the full year, so the second engagement starts where the first left off. For long-running risk surfaces (auth, payment flows, multi-tenant logic) that continuity is the difference between surface finding and chained exploit.
“"AI agents hallucinate vulnerabilities, we don't want garbage in Jira."”
→ Agreed, and that's exactly why we don't ship the model's output direct. Every machine-flagged finding goes through CREST CRT review before reaching your queue. Hallucinations (findings without a working request, response, and reproduction step) die in review, not in your engineering channel. The number to ask any vendor in this space is confirmed-rate per raw flag. Pure-agent tools without human review struggle below half. Ours runs much higher because of the review gate.
“"Our data is too sensitive to send to a SaaS pentest platform."”
→ Agreed, and it doesn't. The runner deploys as Docker inside your VPC. It sees your authenticated traffic, runs the attack chains locally, and ships only finding metadata (endpoint, vulnerability class, severity, fix hash) up to our control plane. Payloads, responses, and evidence captures stay inside your network the whole time. Happy to walk through the data-flow diagram with your security architect on a follow-up call.
Buyer FAQ
How do you handle false positives vs scanner-only tools?
Confirmed-only mode is default. Each finding ships with request, response, and a curl reproducer. The CREST CRT review gate strips scanner-style false positives before findings reach your queue.
What's actual time-to-first-exploit on a new engagement?
Median ten minutes from authenticated runner deployment. No scoping call, no four-week kickoff. Benchmarked on the product page against the industry annual-cadence baseline.
How does your re-test SLA compare to crowd PTaaS?
Re-test runs inside the subscription, automatically, on the next merge to the fixed branch. No new engagement, no new SOW. Crowd PTaaS typically charges per re-test cycle.
Does it replace our annual pentest?
It augments. The annual deep run for business-logic chains stays inside the same subscription. Continuous coverage between annuals means the annual finds fewer surprises.
CERT-In timeline?
Signed report in 10 business days, free retest within 30. Empanelled auditor signs the same engagement. Self-serve INR pricing on the product page.
Pricing vs crowd PTaaS subscription model?
Per-application-tier subscription, fixed for the year. No per-engagement fees, no per-re-test fees, no upcharge for the annual deep run. Sample contract on request.
Who to escalate to at SecureLayer7