Skip to main content
Pixee wins 2026 DEVIES Award for AppSecOps Excellence
Vulnerability Triage

Vulnerability Triage Automation: End Alert Fatigue, Fix What Matters

Your scanners find thousands of issues. Most are noise. Pixee’s independent triage eliminates 80% of false positives across 50+ scanners, then fixes what remains with a 76% developer merge rate.

See Triage Automation Live Calculate Your Triage Cost

Trusted by Fortune 500 security teams across financial services, retail, and technology

80%
False Positive Reduction
74%
Less Manual Triage Time
76%
Developer Merge Rate on Fixes
50+
Scanner Integrations

*Metrics measured across 50+ enterprise deployments. Methodology in benchmarks below.

The Hidden Cost of Manual Triage

Your AppSec team has a math problem. With 5.3 scanning tools generating alerts, 71–88% of those alerts are false positives. A team of 4 security engineers? Two of them are processing noise full-time.

The numbers tell the story:

  • 50–80% of AppSec time goes to manual triage, not fixing vulnerabilities (Customer Research, 2024)
  • 78% of security alerts go completely uninvestigated—not triaged, not resolved, just ignored (Nagomi CISO Pressure Index, 2025)
  • 66% of organizations carry backlogs exceeding 100,000 vulnerabilities (Ponemon Institute, 2024)
  • 48,185 CVEs were published in 2024, a 38% increase from the prior year (NIST NVD)

Meanwhile, your developers outnumber your security team 100 to 1. You cannot hire your way out of this.

Those go back to us. We are not triaging those right now as much as we could be… Generally, it gets ignored.

— Security Team Leader, Fortune 500 Retailer

The industry optimized detection for 20 years and produced 5.3 tools per team. None of those tools fix anything. 58% of breached organizations already had the tools to prevent the breach (Nagomi, 2025). Detection was never the bottleneck. Triage was.

What Is Vulnerability Triage Automation?

Vulnerability triage automation uses exploitability analysis and cross-scanner correlation to eliminate false positives and prioritize real threats—without manual review. Organizations using automated triage reduce false positives by 80%, cut triage time by 74%, and redirect security engineering capacity from alert processing to strategic remediation.

Why Your Scanner Vendor Can’t Solve Triage

The Conflict of Interest

Scanner vendors build their business on detection volume. More findings mean more value perception. Asking your scanner to suppress 80% of its own findings undermines its business model. Independent triage has no incentive to inflate alert counts—Pixee does not sell a scanner and never will.

Siloed Analysis

SonarQube doesn’t know what Snyk found. Checkmarx doesn’t see Fortify’s results. With 5.3 tools per team, each scanner triages only its own output. The same vulnerability flagged by three different tools creates three separate investigations, three JIRA tickets, and three rounds of developer interruption.

You have multiple scanning tools… how do you determine which one is the right set to trust… that has to involve humans, and then you slow down the whole process.

— Security Leader, Fortune 50 Financial Services

Prioritization Is Not Triage

ASPM tools rank your findings by severity. That is not triage. Triage determines whether a finding is real, exploitable, and worth fixing. 88% of CVEs rated “Critical” by CVSS are not actually critical in the context of your application (JFrog, 2025). Reordering a list of noise still gives you noise.

The Poisoned Well

When scanners flood developers with false positives long enough, developers stop trusting any security alert. They mark everything as “false positive” whether it is or not. Trust erosion is one-way and sticky.

Before SonarQube, we used Fortify… most findings are false positive, and they end up marking everything as false positive. When the well is already poisoned, it’s very hard to change developers’ minds anymore.

— Security Team, Asia-Pacific Financial Services (5,000+ developers)

How Automated Triage Works

01
Ingest

Import Findings

Import findings from 50+ scanners into a single unified view. SAST, SCA, DAST, and container scanners all feed into one platform. SARIF ingestion, native APIs, and CI/CD webhooks are supported out of the box. Your Snyk, Checkmarx, and Veracode investments stay intact.

02
Correlate

Cross-Reference & Deduplicate

Cross-reference findings across every scanner to deduplicate. When Snyk, SonarQube, and Checkmarx all flag the same SQL injection, you see one actionable item instead of three. This alone can cut alert volume by 30–50% before any analysis begins.

03
Analyze

Exploitability Analysis

Apply exploitability analysis to each finding using three intelligence types: (1) False positive detection—is this vulnerability real? (2) Business context assessment—is this accepted risk? (3) Risk re-scoring—is the severity accurate for YOUR environment? This goes beyond simple reachability.

04
Prioritize

Rank by Actual Risk

Rank findings by actual risk, not scanner-assigned severity. A CVSS 9.8 that is unexploitable in your environment drops below a CVSS 6.0 that is internet-facing with no authentication. Your team works on what matters, not what scores highest on a generic scale.

05
Route

Deliver & Fix

Deliver validated, prioritized findings to the right team through the right channel. For code-level vulnerabilities, Pixee generates merge-ready pull requests—76% merge rate. For architectural issues, findings route to JIRA with full context. This is where triage meets remediation.

How Much Is Manual Triage Costing You?

Every hour your AppSec team spends clicking “false positive” is an hour they are not spending on architecture reviews, threat modeling, or incident response. Calculate the hidden cost of manual triage for your team.

Calculate Your Triage Cost

Manual Triage vs Automated Triage

Dimension Manual Triage Automated Triage
Time per finding 15–45 minutes Seconds
False positive rate 71–88% (scanner-reported) Below 20% (post-analysis)
Cross-scanner deduplication Manual spreadsheet or JIRA Automatic correlation
Exploitability verification Rare—too time-consuming Every finding, every time
Team capacity on triage 50–80% of AppSec time Under 10%, rest on strategy
Backlog growth rate Accelerating (more scanners = more noise) Stabilizing (noise removed at source)
Scalability Linear with headcount Independent of headcount
Alert coverage 5–20% of alerts investigated 100% of alerts assessed

Sources: Ponemon Institute (2024), Nagomi CISO Pressure Index (2025), Black Duck Global DevSecOps Report (2025), Pixee Platform Data (2025)

50, 60 to 70 to 80% of findings are false positives OR not important OR don’t need to be fixed. The triage effort is entirely manual and requires expertise.

SL

Security Leader

Fortune 500 Financial Services

How Pixee Compares to Industry Averages

Metric Pixee Industry Average Source
False positive reduction 80% Manual only (no automated alternative at scale) Pixee Platform Data (50+ deployments), 2025
Triage time reduction 74% Baseline: 50–80% of AppSec time (manual) Pixee Platform Data (50+ deployments), 2025
Alerts investigated 100% 22% Nagomi CISO Pressure Index, 2025
Developer merge rate 76% Below 20% (generic AI) Pixee Platform Data (50+ deployments), 2025
Mean time to remediation 2 days 252 days Pixee / Veracode SOSS, 2024

Triage is where AppSec teams go to die. You hire brilliant security engineers, then watch them spend the majority of their day clicking ‘false positive’ on findings that three different scanners independently got wrong. Automated triage is not a luxury. It is how you stop burning out the people who are supposed to be protecting your organization.

AD

Arshan Dabirsiaghi, CTO at Pixee

Former OWASP Board Member

Frequently Asked Questions

Vulnerability triage automation uses exploitability analysis and cross-scanner correlation to automatically classify, prioritize, and route security findings. It eliminates manual review of false positives and duplicates, reducing the 71–88% false positive rate that drains AppSec team capacity.
Pixee applies exploitability analysis to every finding from every scanner. It checks whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable, whether the conditions for exploitation exist in your environment, and whether existing security controls mitigate the risk. Findings that fail these checks are classified as non-exploitable with evidence.
No. It redirects their time from alert processing to strategic work—architecture reviews, threat modeling, and incident response. Teams using automated triage report spending 50–80% less time on repetitive triage and more time on high-value security decisions.
Pixee integrates natively with 50+ scanners including SonarQube, Snyk, Checkmarx, Veracode, Fortify, GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep, and CodeQL. Findings are ingested, deduplicated across scanners, and analyzed for exploitability in a single unified view. Any SARIF-producing tool is supported.
Prioritization ranks findings by severity—usually the scanner’s own scoring. Triage determines whether a finding is real, exploitable, and worth fixing. A “Critical” false positive should be dismissed. A “Medium” finding that is directly exploitable should be escalated. Triage changes the list. Prioritization reorders it.
Under one hour from install to first triaged findings, validated in 30+ enterprise POCs. Connect your scanner outputs via SARIF, API, or CI/CD webhook and Pixee begins analyzing immediately. No training period, no rule configuration, no tuning required.
Both. Pixee automates the full workflow: triage (80% false positive reduction) and remediation (76% developer merge rate on automated fixes). Triage determines what to fix. Remediation fixes it. This is the complete closed loop from scanner alert to merged pull request.
By eliminating 80% of false positives, deduplicating cross-scanner findings, and routing validated vulnerabilities directly to automated fix generation, Pixee reduces the time from scanner alert to merged fix from an industry average of 252 days to under 48 hours.
Pixee does not replace your existing scanners. It does not perform application penetration testing. It does not manage your compliance program. Pixee resolves the findings your existing tools detect—triage determines what is real, remediation fixes what is real.

Stop Triaging Alerts. Start Fixing Real Vulnerabilities.

Your scanners found the problems. Pixee resolves them. See how automated triage eliminates 80% of noise and automated remediation fixes what remains—with a 76% developer merge rate.

Book a Demo Calculate Your Triage Cost
pixee logo

Follow Us

© {{year}} Pixee Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy