Assess

Frontier AI vulnerability discovery

Find vulnerabilities in your code using frontier AI models before attackers do.

Talk to an AI security specialist

Share what you need and a consultant will follow up to book a call.

What your engineering team gets

Truvo builds the system from whatever security maturity level you are at.

icon-9

Validated findings only

Every finding is adversarially validated against the live application before your team sees it. A ticket that arrives is real and comes with a patch and the unit test that demonstrates the exploit.

icon-7

Discovery harness in your environment

A frontier model, driven by an agent harness in your own GCP, AWS, Azure or private cloud, triggered by a commit, a pull request or a scheduled sweep. The harness can be a general-purpose coding agent such as Claude Code, OpenAI Codex CLI or Gemini CLI, steered by your threat model, or a purpose-built discovery harness we stand up for you.

icon-2

Adversarial validation

An agent in a container inside your cloud spins up the target, attempts the exploit, and captures success as a unit-test proof of concept. Findings it cannot exploit are closed with written reasoning.

icon-8

Human-gated pull requests

A reviewer checks every agent-proposed pull request before it opens. By the time a PR reaches engineering, a person has read it.

icon-5

Static and dynamic testing in one loop

Discovery and dynamic validation happen continuously, complementary to the annual penetration testing.

icon-6

Compliance evidence as a byproduct

Findings, validation results, closure reasoning, remediation PRs and metrics over time: the vulnerability management record SOC 2, ISO 27001 and enterprise questionnaires ask for.

Two ways to hold the capability

Truvo operates the loop, or your engineers learn to build it.

icon-1

Live instructor-led workshop

Application security, DevSecOps and platform engineers configure the harness, the adversarial agent, the human gate and the metrics in a lab environment. Six modules, labs and a capstone.

icon-5

Operate: tuning and model evaluation

Truvo tunes the harness against your threat model, evaluates each significant new model release on your own code, and reports metrics on a recurring cadence.

icon-3

Penetration testing and advisory

The loop does not replace a scoped penetration test. Where one is needed, Truvo scopes and coordinates it against the same threat model.

Assess, Build, Operate, applied to your codebase

The same model as the rest of the security program. A documented methodology, led by a senior architect with more than ten years of enterprise security experience and a CISSP. The loop is live against the first application at the end of Build, and coverage expands once it is proven.

01

Assess

We map your vulnerability discovery process end to end: what scanning exists, how findings flow, who triages, what gets fixed, and whether the application can be spun up in a test environment. Output: current-state assessment, gap map, threat model, operating design.

02

Build

The loop is stood up in your own cloud on one contained application: discovery harness, adversarial agent, human-gated PR flow, false-positive closure flow, metrics dashboard, runbooks and handover documentation.

03

Operate

Harness tuning against the threat model, evaluation of each significant new model release on your code, recurring metrics reports. The human gate stays with Truvo or transfers to your reviewers.

Metrics accumulate from the first cycle

Every validated finding and every closure feeds a metrics store. Those numbers decide when to tune the harness, when to change the model, and how tight the human gate should be.

Book a strategy call

  • True-positive rate

  • False-positive rate

  • Cost per validated finding

  • Effectiveness by model

  • Coverage movement over time

  • Model comparison on your own codebase

What you receive

Named up front, including the client dependencies: cloud environment access, code access, and a way to spin up the application.

Assess deliverables

Current-state assessment of the vulnerability discovery process, a gap map with prioritized remediation, a threat model built or reviewed, and an operating design for the loop.

Build deliverables

Loop infrastructure as code in your environment, trigger integration, the adversarial agent, the human-gated PR and closure flows as runbooks, a metrics dashboard, handover documentation.

Operate deliverables

Recurring metrics report, harness tuning changes with rationale tied to the threat model, and model evaluation notes for every significant new release.

Evidence for your program

A continuous record of vulnerability management activity that answers auditors and enterprise security questionnaires from the same engineering work.

When the loop is the right call, and when it is not

Most clients start with nothing producing findings today, and that is a normal starting point.

Right call when

  • You own the source, the build system and a way to spin the application up in a test environment

  • Vulnerability management activity is something SOC 2, ISO 27001 auditors or enterprise questionnaires keep asking you to evidence

  • SAST, SCA and penetration testing exist as disconnected activities, or not at all

  • Your engineering team will accept validated findings with patches, and will not accept another list of unvalidated alerts

Wrong call when

  • The codebase cannot be spun up outside production and no test environment can be built

  • Your data policies forbid any model access to source, even inside your own cloud

  • You want a one-time scan report rather than an operating loop

Frequently asked questions

No. The default assumption is that nothing produces usable findings yet and Truvo builds the discovery system from scratch, which is the case for most companies. Where you already run scanning or a harness worth keeping, Assess identifies it and Build integrates it by webhook or polling instead of duplicating it.

The harness is the software around the model: it decides what the model is allowed to do, holds context across a long run, verifies what the model claims to have found, and hands decisions back to a person. Research from Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 and from UC Santa Barbara and Fuzzland shows the harness, more than the model, drives how many real vulnerabilities get found. General-purpose coding agents such as Anthropic's Claude Code, OpenAI's Codex CLI and Google's Gemini CLI can serve as the harness when steered by a threat model. Purpose-built systems such as Google's Big Sleep and Unit 42's NOVA show what a dedicated discovery harness looks like. Truvo picks or builds the harness to fit your codebase, and the model behind it, Claude, GPT and Codex, or Gemini, is swapped as evaluations on your own code dictate.

In your own cloud, on GCP, AWS or Azure. The discovery harness, the adversarial agent and the metrics store are deployed as infrastructure as code in your environment. By default one model discovers and a second, different model reviews, where your data policies permit.

A finding counts as confirmed only once a unit-test proof of concept exists. An agent in a container spins up the target application, attempts to exploit the finding, and captures a successful exploit as a test. Findings the agent cannot exploit are closed with written reasoning, so triage noise goes down and the harness has something to learn from.

An agent proposes them. A human reviewer checks every agent-proposed pull request before it opens, so by the time a PR reaches your engineering team a person has already read it. The gate can stay with Truvo or transfer to your own reviewers after Build.

The loop produces a continuous record of vulnerability management activity: findings, validation results, closure reasoning, remediation pull requests and metrics over time. Validated vulnerability management with metrics is what SOC 2 and ISO 27001 auditors ask for, and what enterprise security questionnaires ask for, so the same engineering work removes a sales blocker.

Yes. The live instructor-led workshop teaches application security, DevSecOps and platform engineers to configure the harness, the adversarial agent, the human gate and the metrics in a lab environment, so the capability stays in house.

Talk to the architect who would do the work

A 30-minute call. We look at your environment and say plainly whether we can help and what it would take.

From the blog: vulnerability management

Stock photo by Ann H via Pexels, illustrating vulnerability management security scanning (temporary placeholder pending custom hero design).

SOC 2 CC7.1: Detecting Configuration Changes and New Vulnerabilities

SOC 2 CC7.1 is where the vulnerability management program lives inside the Trust Services Criteria: it requires an organization to detect ...

Learn More
A cybersecurity operations infographic. A triage queue lists high, medium, and low priority findings like Log4j and weak server config. AI analyzes exploits from bugs (Low risk) to a malicious face (Medium). A dashboard displays a 9.8 CVSS score. Two analysts review the data near servers

What Project Glasswing Actually Means for Your Security Program

I have been thinking about what Anthropic's Project Glasswing announcement actually means for the clients we advise. The honest answer is that it ...

Learn More