Enji GuardAutomated web application vulnerability scanning, tied to your GitHub repo
Guard is not just a web application vulnerability scanner, it ties runtime checks to the GitHub repo your AI-generated code lives in. Guard runs bounded runtime checks against the staging or production targets you approve, links findings back to the repository context, and opens issues or pull requests with reproduction notes.
1 repo · setup in about 5 minutes · no card, no commitment
01
Why static checks are not enough for AI-built apps
Reading source tells you what the code intends. It does not tell you that an endpoint is unauthenticated in production, that a form leaks data, or that a rate limit never fires. AI-built apps ship these gaps constantly, and they only show up at runtime.
02
Repo plus website, mapped together
Connect the repo and the URL it serves. Guard treats them as one system, so a runtime finding is never an orphaned alert; it comes back with likely routes, affected code areas, and reproduction notes.
03
Runtime checks that matter
Authorized, bounded scheduled checks against approved staging or production targets cover the behavior static analysis can't see. Guard brings web application vulnerability scanner coverage back to GitHub web app security:
- Auth and access control on real routes
- Rate limiting and abuse protection
- Forms, inputs, and user journeys
- Security headers and API behavior
04
From finding to code path
Runtime findings come back with reproduction context and likely code areas, not just a red status on a separate scanner page. For approved scopes, Guard can run continuous penetration testing-style probes and return evidence your team can review.
05
Issue and PR remediation
Findings come back as reviewable GitHub issues with evidence and rationale. When a fix is bounded and useful, Guard can open a narrow pull request for human review.
Quick questions
Does this replace a real penetration test?
No, and it does not pretend to. Guard runs automated, bounded runtime checks on a schedule to catch the obvious gaps between manual pentests. It does not replace a human pentester for deep, creative work.
How is this different from a standalone web application vulnerability scanner?
A standalone scanner reports a URL and a finding. Because Guard links the app to its GitHub repo, a runtime finding comes back with likely code areas and reproduction context, so it is fixable, not just alarming.
Do you need production access, or can it test staging?
Either, within a scope you approve. Most teams point it at staging, and you decide which environment and which routes are in bounds.
Is this SAST or DAST?
Both sides. Guard pairs static review of the code with dynamic checks against the running app, so issues that only appear at runtime are caught next to the code that causes them.
Test the app, not just the code.
Connect a repo and its URL, and get your first runtime report in a few minutes. No card.