Keygraph: the AI native
Semgrep replacement
Semgrep is the best rule-based scanner in the business: fast, deterministic, deeply loved by developers, and free to start. It matches your code against tens of thousands of rules and flags what looks wrong, and because those rules are written to resemble the code they catch, the results are transparent, customizable, and easy to reason about. For many teams, that's a genuinely strong place to begin. But the same design that makes Semgrep fast is also its ceiling. A rule can only catch what someone already thought to write a rule for, and every finding it returns is a maybe until something proves it actually matters. Keygraph takes a different approach: rather than matching patterns, it reasons about how your code actually behaves, proves each real vulnerability with a working exploit, and re-runs that exploit after the fix to confirm the issue is genuinely gone.
Pattern-matching finds the known. Reasoning finds the rest.
Semgrep parses source into ASTs and matches rules written to mirror the code they catch, with cross-file taint analysis in the Pro Engine. That design is exactly why it's fast, deterministic, and easy to extend. It's also the ceiling: detection is bounded by what the rule set describes, and a match carries no evidence of reachability or impact. Keygraph reasons over program behavior instead, then validates each candidate by exploiting it.
Match a pattern
Prove it works
An exploit is reproducible ground truth.
Semgrep's strongest argument is that rules are deterministic and AI is probabilistic, and security teams want reproducible, audit-grade results. It's a fair point, and it's why Keygraph doesn't bet everything on reasoning: it runs deterministic engines for dependencies, IaC, and secrets, and brings reasoning in where rules fall short.
But the deepest form of reproducibility isn't a pattern match; it's a working exploit. It either fires or it doesn't, every time. A reproduced exploit proves impact; a rule match only proves presence. And the industry already agrees the line is moving: Semgrep itself now ships AI-powered detection for flaws like IDOR and broken authorization. The real question was never rules versus AI. It's who pairs reasoning with proof.
Semgrep and Keygraph both find candidate vulnerabilities in your code. The difference is everything after detection.
After Find, Semgrep hands the queue to your team to triage, fix, and re-scan. Keygraph continues through Prove, Fix, and Verify on its own.
Detection across the code-side surface: SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, and containers. Semgrep matches patterns and adds AI detection in its Multimodal add-on; Keygraph runs CPG plus LLM reasoning at every node.
Keygraph exploits each finding against the running app and ships a reproducible PoC, labeling every result exploited, potential, or false positive. Semgrep returns candidates to triage; it does not exploit the running app.
Keygraph drives the remediation: source-level fixes on one deduplicated, Jira-synced findings list with SLA tracking, rather than handing the team a list of candidates.
Keygraph re-runs the original exploit after the fix. If it fails, the vulnerability is genuinely gone, not just that the rule stopped matching, and the result rolls into the system of record.
Presence is not impact.
Security teams need reproducible, audit-grade results, and that concern is fair. Keygraph does not lean on reasoning alone: it runs deterministic engines for SCA, IaC, and secrets, and brings LLM reasoning in only where static rules fall short. The boundary is already shifting, Semgrep itself now ships AI detection for IDOR and broken authorization.
But the most rigorous form of reproducibility is not a rule that matches, it is an exploit that succeeds or fails deterministically against the target. A rule match indicates presence; an exploit demonstrates impact. That is where a platform that validates and re-verifies pulls away from a scanner that hands back candidates.
How Keygraph compares to Semgrep
| Capability | Keygraph | Semgrep |
|---|---|---|
| Static analysis | ||
| AI native SASTReasoning, not just patterns | ✓CPG plus LLM reasoning at every node | ✓rule/pattern-based; Pro Engine adds cross-file dataflow plus 20,000+ Pro rules; AI detection limited to the Multimodal add-on |
| SCA + reachabilityReachable CVEs first | ✓advisory to function to real call chain, then confirms reachability by exploiting it | ✓Supply Chain prioritizes reachable dependency vulns |
| Secret scanningValidated secret detection | ✓40+ types + LLM context pass; masking | ✓semantic + entropy analysis with validation |
| AI false-positive triageLess noise to review | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dynamic testing & exploitation | ||
| Dynamic pentest of the running appAttacks the live app | ✓autonomous agents exploit the live app in a real browser | –static only; DAST needs a third-party integration |
| Black-box testingExternal attacker view, zero knowledge | ✓zero-knowledge agents attack from outside, no code access | –static analysis only |
| Gray-box testingBlack-box plus provided context and steerability | ✓optional credentials, focus areas, business context, and OpenAPI specs steer the agents | – |
| Exploit validation / PoCProof, not theory | ✓every finding exploited, reproducible PoC; unverified stripped | –findings are candidates to triage |
| Business-logic testingInvariant discovery + PoC | ✓invariant discovery + violation + PoC | Partialcustom rules, plus AI IDOR/broken-auth detection via Semgrep Multimodal (launched 2026); no dynamic exploit of the running app |
| Correlation & remediation | ||
| Static-dynamic correlationThe source map directs the pentest | ✓static map directs the pentest; one correlated result set | – |
| Findings system of recordOne canonical record | ✓one canonical, deduplicated finding per vuln across tools, with SLA tracking and bidirectional Jira sync | Partialconsolidated within its own suite; no cross-vendor canonical record or remediation-SLA policy |
| Deployment & trust | ||
| Runs air-gappedEngine runs in your perimeter | ✓on-prem or self-hosted in your own perimeter; source, scan results, and AI inference never leave your network | Partialself-hosts, but Assistant sends code to OpenAI for AI features |
| BYOK: model traffic stays yoursYour key, your gateway | ✓your own key, model, or AI gateway, including a self-hosted LiteLLM gateway, with usage tracking; your Anthropic key, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI, or a compatible endpoint | PartialOpenAI/Bedrock by default; BYO key (OpenAI/Bedrock/Azure/Gemini) drops its tuned models; no fully air-gapped inference |
| Open source & pricing | ||
| Open sourceRead it before you buy | ✓Shannon, AGPL-3.0, 44k+ stars | PartialCE engine is LGPL-2.1, but rules moved proprietary (Dec 2024), prompting the OpenGrep fork |
| Pricing (public, sourced)What you actually pay | total AppSec spend and cadence: no published seat price. Shannon (OSS) is free | Free ≤10 contributors / 10 private repos; Team from $30/contributor/mo (as of 2026-06-03) |
Swipe to compare →
Compare security budgets, not seat prices.
A scanner seat next to a platform seat is the wrong comparison. The real one is a single platform against a scanner plus the separate pentest it still needs, plus the gap between them. Semgrep is static-only, so a team that needs assurance about the running app still buys a third-party penetration test on top.
A contributor is anyone who made at least one commit to a Semgrep-scanned private repo in the last 90 days. Pricing sources: Semgrep Team tier from $30 per contributor per month, with Secrets a separate $15/contributor add-on (semgrep.dev/pricing, as of 2026-06-03). A third-party web-application penetration test runs an industry range of $10,000 to $30,000 per engagement (TCM Security, Redfox Security, DeepStrike, 2026). Keygraph Pro from $50/developer/month, a floor price, computed here at the same headcount. Estimates for comparison only; actual costs vary by scope.
Four things a scanner leaves on the table
A candidate to triage, not a confirmed bug
A Semgrep rule fires when code resembles a known vulnerability, so your team is still left sorting real findings from false ones. Keygraph exploits each finding against the running app and reports only what is exploit-validated, with a reproducible PoC. A rule match indicates presence; an exploit demonstrates impact.
Finding it is the start, not the finish
Semgrep hands you candidates and triage; the fix and the proof it worked happen elsewhere. Keygraph drives remediation and re-exploits to verify, find then prove then fix then verify in one place, so the finding that goes in is the closure that comes out.
Risk a static rule never sees fire
A novel flaw, or one that emerges from how components interact, produces no match for a rule no author anticipated, and a static scanner cannot exploit it against the deployed app. Keygraph runs data-flow and behavioral analysis, then validates against the live app, so reachable, exploitable risk is the result, not a list of candidates.
Verified closure, in your perimeter
Re-scanning only confirms a pattern no longer matches, which a clever patch can satisfy without fixing the bug. Keygraph re-runs the original exploit to confirm the vulnerability is genuinely gone, and runs inside your own environment, so source, inference, and the whole loop stay in your perimeter.
Get more with Keygraph
FAQ
Keygraph's agentic pentester attacks the live app in a real browser and labels every result EXPLOITED, POTENTIAL, or FALSE POSITIVE with a reproducible PoC. Semgrep is static only; dynamic testing needs a third-party DAST integration.
Learn moreThe static map directs the pentest, and both stages merge into one correlated result per vulnerability. Semgrep has no dynamic side to correlate against.
Learn moreKeygraph discovers an application's invariants, then exploits IDOR, broken auth, and tenant-isolation flaws against the running app. Semgrep Multimodal now flags these statically with AI reasoning, but never exploits them against the running app to prove they are real.
Learn moreRe-scanning confirms the pattern no longer matches, which a clever patch can satisfy without actually fixing the bug. Keygraph re-runs the original exploit. If it fails, the vulnerability is genuinely gone. That's verification, not a green checkmark.
Learn moreDoes Keygraph replace Semgrep?
Does Semgrep test my running application?
What's the difference between Semgrep Assistant and Keygraph's exploitation?
Is Semgrep's free tier really enough?
What is OpenGrep, and does it affect this comparison?
Does my source code or model traffic leave my environment?
How is Keygraph priced compared to Semgrep's per-contributor model?
Don't take our word for it,
try out Keygraph for yourself!
Run Keygraph against your own environment and judge the results: working exploits against your running app, and fixes proven closed.
Sources
Claims about Semgrep on this page are drawn from the primary references below, verified June 8, 2026.
- Semgrep, Pricing (free tier limits, Team from $30/contributor, Secrets $15 add-on). https://semgrep.dev/pricing/
- Semgrep Docs, Usage and billing (contributor definition). https://docs.semgrep.dev/usage-and-billing/overview
- Semgrep Docs, Semgrep Assistant overview (runs on OpenAI, AWS Bedrock fallback). https://docs.semgrep.dev/semgrep-assistant/overview/
- Semgrep, Assistant GA launch (~97% agreement with auto-triage). https://semgrep.dev/blog/2024/assistant-ga-launch/
- Semgrep, Introducing Semgrep Multimodal (AI IDOR / broken-auth detection). https://semgrep.dev/blog/2026/attackers-cant-have-all-the-advantage-introducing-semgrep-multimodal/
- Semgrep, Semgrep Supply Chain (reachability-based SCA). https://semgrep.dev/products/semgrep-supply-chain/
- Semgrep, Semgrep Secrets (semantic and entropy analysis with validation). https://semgrep.dev/products/semgrep-secrets/
- Semgrep, Important updates to Semgrep OSS (December 2024 rules license change). https://semgrep.dev/blog/2024/important-updates-to-semgrep-oss/
- InfoQ, Semgrep engine forked as OpenGrep (LGPL-2.1, January 2025). https://www.infoq.com/news/2025/02/semgrep-forked-opengrep/
- Semgrep, Recognized in the 2025 Gartner Magic Quadrant for Application Security Testing. https://semgrep.dev/blog/2025/semgrep-recognized-in-gartner-magic-quadrant/
- Semgrep, SAST + DAST in sync with StackHawk (DAST is a third-party integration). https://semgrep.dev/blog/2025/sast-dast-finally-in-sync-how-semgrep-stackhawk-help-appsec-teams-prioritize-real-risks/
- Semgrep Docs, Customize Assistant (BYO key: OpenAI, self-hosted Amazon Bedrock, Azure OpenAI, Google Gemini, xAI; default OpenAI + Bedrock). https://docs.semgrep.dev/semgrep-assistant/customize
- Semgrep Docs, Triage and remediation (findings consolidated within the AppSec Platform; findings are candidates to triage). https://docs.semgrep.dev/semgrep-code/triage-remediation
- Semgrep Docs, Assistant privacy (Assistant sends code to OpenAI by default for AI features). https://docs.semgrep.dev/semgrep-assistant/privacy
- Semgrep, open-source repository (custom rules read like the code they match; OSS engine). https://github.com/semgrep/semgrep
- Semgrep Docs, Rule ideas (deterministic, hand-written rules for specific, repeatable patterns). https://docs.semgrep.dev/writing-rules/rule-ideas