Keygraph: Pentesting That
Goes Further Than XBOW
XBOW is built to do one thing extraordinarily well: autonomously discover and prove what is exploitable, then deliver validated proofs-of-concept and compliance-ready reports. But a pentest scans only what it is pointed at. Everything around the exploit, including the rest of the attack surface and the work of actually closing a finding, sits outside its scope. This is where Keygraph takes a broader approach. It runs that same offensive testing, black-box or white-box, then adds continuous SAST, SCA, secrets, and IaC scanning across the whole surface, ties every finding back to your code, and re-runs the exploit after a fix to confirm the issue is genuinely closed. All self-hosted in your own environment and embedded in your SDLC, giving you one system of record from initial finding through verified closure.
A great pentest isn't a whole AppSec program.
XBOW set out to automate the blackbox pentesting process. A pentest, however strong, is one component of an application security program: your team still has to cover the surface the test never reached, remediate what it finds, and verify the fixes. Keygraph pairs that same autonomous offensive testing with the platform that runs the rest, built as a force multiplier for security teams and pentesters, not a replacement for them.
A specialist attacker
- +Autonomous testing of the running app, at machine scale
- +Validated PoCs and compliance-ready pentest reports
- +Black-box by default, with optional source upload as context
- –No continuous SAST, SCA, secrets, or IaC scanning
- –Doesn't own the fix-and-verify loop in your SDLC
- –Hosted platform; self-hosted deployment not publicly documented
The whole program
- +Exploits running apps, black-box and white-box
- +Continuous SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, and container scanning
- +Findings tied to code, with static-dynamic correlation
- +Drives the fix and re-runs the exploit to verify it
- +Self-hosted in your perimeter, on your own keys
- +One system of record, from finding to verified closure
Both find and prove. Only one closes the loop.
XBOW and Keygraph both do the offensive half: autonomous discovery, real exploitation, validated proof. The difference is everything around and after the exploit: who covers the rest of the surface, who drives the fix, and who proves the fix held.
XBOW finds and proves vulnerabilities against the running app, then hands the report to your team. Keygraph continues through Fix and Verify on its own.
Both discover vulnerabilities autonomously. XBOW maps the running app; Keygraph also sweeps the code behind it: SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, and containers.
Real, working exploits with reproducible PoCs. This is XBOW's home turf, and Keygraph matches it. Proof, not theory, on both sides.
Keygraph drives the remediation: source-level fixes on one deduplicated, Jira-synced findings list with SLA tracking, rather than handing your team a report.
After the fix ships, Keygraph re-runs the exploit and re-scans to confirm the vulnerability is gone for good, then closes it in the system of record.
Offense is commoditizing. Closure isn't.
XBOW proved that autonomous exploitation works at scale, and topping HackerOne against production targets is a genuinely hard result. Keygraph fields the same capability: autonomous testing validated by working exploits. On pure offense, call it a draw.
But as offensive AI matures, landing an exploit stops being the differentiator. What separates products now is everything around it: covering what a pentest doesn't scan, owning the fix, and verifying the issue stays closed. That's where a platform pulls away from a pentest-only product.
How Keygraph compares to XBOW
| Capability | Keygraph | XBOW |
|---|---|---|
| Autonomous offense | ||
| Autonomous pentest of the running appReal attacks at machine scale | ✓ | ✓ |
| Black-box testingExternal attacker view, zero knowledge | ✓zero-knowledge agents attack from outside, no code access | ✓its core discipline; external attacker view |
| Gray-box testingBlack-box plus provided context and steerability | ✓optional credentials, focus areas, business context, and OpenAPI specs steer the agents | ✓optional source upload and context steer its attacks |
| Exploit validation / reproducible PoCReproducible, not theoretical | ✓ | ✓ |
| Coverage & correlation | ||
| Whitebox (source-aware) testingAgents read your source | ✓agents read your source and generate precise exploits | Partialblack-box by default; optional source upload as context, not a source analyzer |
| Source-side SAST / SCA / secrets / IaC / containerThe code-side surface | ✓the full source-side suite | –not marketed (offense only) |
| Static-dynamic correlationThe source map directs the pentest | ✓the static map directs the pentest | Partialmerges uploaded source with dynamic testing; no documented persistent correlated record |
| Business-logic testingInvariant discovery + PoC | ✓source-informed invariant discovery + PoC | Partialblack-box exploration may surface some |
| 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 | Partialhosted; self-hosted or air-gapped deployment not publicly documented |
| BYOK: model traffic stays yoursYour key, your gateway | ✓your own key, model, or AI gateway, including a self-hosted LiteLLM gateway, with usage tracking | –not publicly documented |
| Open core, remediation & pricing | ||
| Open sourceRead it before you buy | ✓Shannon, AGPL-3.0, 44k+ stars | –proprietary platform |
| Verified-patch remediation + system of recordFix, prove, track to closure | ✓fix → re-scan to prove → labeled PR; one canonical, deduplicated, Jira-synced findings list with SLA tracking | Partialoffense-centric: find → validate → document → suggest fixes |
| Pricing (public, sourced)What you actually pay | Pro from $50/developer/month (managed); Shannon (OSS) free; Enterprise custom, flat annual | per-test pricing from ~$4,000/test; enterprise custom |
Swipe to compare →
What continuous offense really costs.
XBOW bills per test, so the cost climbs with every engagement. Keygraph is one per-developer price for continuous testing across every app, with source-side scanning XBOW doesn't include.
Pricing sources: XBOW $4,000/test (Plus), $8,000/test (Premium), Enterprise by quote (xbow.com/pricing, as of June 2026). High-cadence programs are typically Enterprise by quote; the figures shown use Plus list price. Keygraph Pro from $50/developer/month, a floor price. Estimates for comparison only.
Four things an attacker leaves on the table
A pentest engine, not the whole program
XBOW is a specialist: autonomous exploitation of the running app, at machine scale. Keygraph runs that and the rest of the program: continuous detection across the whole surface, findings tied to your codebase, and a loop driven to closure. A pentest finds exploits; an AppSec platform runs the program.
Finding it is the start, not the finish
XBOW hands you validated exploits and a report; the fix, and the proof it worked, are still your team's job. Keygraph drives remediation and re-exploits to verify: find → prove → fix → verify in one place, so the finding that goes in is the closure that comes out.
Risk that never shows up as a web exploit
A vulnerable dependency, a leaked secret, a misconfigured Terraform file, an insecure container: none of these surface as a running-app exploit, and an exploitation engine isn't built to scan for them. Keygraph covers the full AppSec surface, not just the layer an attacker reaches at runtime.
Find through verified closure, self-hosted
XBOW is offense delivered as a hosted service. Keygraph runs inside your own environment, self-hosted or air-gapped, so the whole loop, source included, never leaves your perimeter.
Get more with Keygraph
FAQ
Keygraph's whitebox agents read your full source to generate precise exploits, alongside a blackbox pentester with zero code access. XBOW is black-box by default and can ingest source to steer its attacks, but runs no standalone whitebox analysis of your codebase.
Learn moreKeygraph also runs CPG and LLM SAST, reachability-ranked SCA, secrets, IaC, and container analysis. XBOW is offense-first and doesn't offer a source-side scanning suite (SAST/SCA/secrets/IaC).
Learn moreKeygraph's static map directs the pentest, so a proven-executable CVE or a static IDOR becomes a targeted exploit, kept as one correlated record across scans. XBOW can use uploaded source to guide an individual attack, but doesn't maintain a persistent source-to-runtime record as a system of record.
Learn moreKeygraph's engine is Shannon, AGPL-3.0 with 44k+ stars. XBOW is a proprietary platform.
Learn moreIs Keygraph just another XBOW?
Does XBOW analyze source code (whitebox)?
Can I run it in my own environment, on my own keys?
Is either one open source?
How is Keygraph priced compared to XBOW?
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 XBOW on this page are drawn from the primary references below, verified June 8, 2026.
- XBOW, Pentest (autonomous offensive testing, exploit validation, compliance-ready reports). https://xbow.com/pentest
- XBOW, Pricing (per-test pricing). https://xbow.com/pricing
- XBOW, Top 1%: how XBOW reached #1 on the HackerOne US leaderboard (2025). https://xbow.com/blog/top-1-how-xbow-did-it
- XBOW, AI-driven pentesting vs DAST (black-box by default; optional source-code upload as context to refine exploits). https://xbow.com/blog/xbow-ai-pentesting-vs-dast
- XBOW, How agentic AI merges static and dynamic testing (uses uploaded source to guide dynamic attacks). https://xbow.com/blog/tales-from-the-trace-how-agentic-ai-merges-static-and-dynamic-testing
- XBOW, What is AI pentesting (black-box exploration of the running app). https://xbow.com/blog/what-is-ai-pentesting
- XBOW, Platform (hosted; self-hosted/air-gapped deployment not publicly documented). https://xbow.com/platform
- XBOW, Alloy agents (model-agnostic; customer BYOK not publicly documented). https://xbow.com/blog/alloy-agents