Phying News
P非影 中文
Curated security research, vulnerabilities, advisories and tools for practitioners.

Introducing Hacktron Review

hacktron.ai | blog | #ai-security | #devsecops | #code-review | #false-positives | #pull-request | #hacktron-review

Summary

Hacktron Review is an AI security reviewer for pull requests that understands codebase context, reduces false positives, and catches exploitable vulnerabilities before they are merged.
Published
Collected

original ↗

Related coverage

blog · borghq.io
How Automatic Retests Verify a Fix When Your PR Merges
How Borg's Odin verifies fixes when a linked pull request merges: it reviews the merged code change rather than the running app, deciding whether a finding is resolved, plus its limits.
blog · projectdiscovery.io
Continuous PR Security Review
Post-mortem vulnerabilities often look harmless in the diff—they only surface at runtime. ProjectDiscovery says LLM code review hits just 63% precision, so PRs need validation on a running app.
blog · hacktron.ai
Hacktron Review for Open Source
We are opening up Hacktron Review for Open Source, giving qualifying maintainers free PR security reviews with inline findings, auto-resolution, and project-specific learning.
blog · about.gitlab.com
When to use SAST versus an LLM security scanner
AI-based review and SAST catch different classes of bugs and both have benefits. Here's how to decide which one runs where, and when your team needs both.
blog · hacktron.ai
Could Modern Code Review Have Prevented wp2shell?
We recreated the WordPress pull requests behind CVE-2026-63030 and CVE-2026-60137 to test whether today's code reviewers and SAST tools would catch both vulnerabilities.
blog · bughunters.google.com
Non-Actionable Findings in 3rd-party Security Scanners...and How to Identify Them
False positives from third-party scanners are a recurring problem. Google's AutoVM team reviews the most common types of non-actionable scanner findings and explains how to identify them.
back