Back to Blog
BenchmarkPenetration TestingWeb Security

We Publish Our Web Pentest Benchmark Results. Nobody Else Does.

February 26, 20265 min readRedVolt Team

Everyone in cybersecurity talks about how good their tools are. Nobody shows the receipts. We do — because we can.

This is RedVolt's AI penetration testing engine, benchmarked against OWASP Juice Shop — one of the most widely recognized deliberately vulnerable web applications in the security industry. No hand-picked demos. No synthetic targets designed to make us look good. A real application with real vulnerabilities, scored against a rigorous ground truth catalog.

The Results

100%

Critical Detection Rate

100%

High Detection Rate

90.3%

OWASP Top 10 Coverage

60 min

Total Scan Time

Let that sink in. Every critical vulnerability found. Every high-severity vulnerability found. Over 90% of the OWASP Top 10 categories covered — in a single automated run, with zero human intervention.

Why Nobody Else Publishes Benchmarks

The security industry has a transparency problem. Vendors make bold claims — "AI-powered," "next-gen," "autonomous" — but when you ask for detection rates against standardized targets, silence.

Here is why:

The Industry Transparency Gap

They cannot measure it

Most tools do not have a formal QA pipeline. They run demos on hand-picked targets and call it a day. No ground truth catalog, no scoring engine, no regression tracking.

They do not want to measure it

When you benchmark honestly, you expose gaps. Most vendors would rather not know their false positive rate than publish it and face scrutiny.

Their numbers are not good enough

Some have internal benchmarks they will never publish. If your detection rate is 40%, marketing would rather talk about "AI-driven insights" than show the scoreboard.

RedVolt is different

We run it on every release. And we publish the results — because hiding from your own numbers is not how you build trust.

Detailed Breakdown

Severity Detection Rates

2/2

Critical Vulns Found

6/6

High Vulns Found

90.3%

Overall Coverage

0

Human Intervention

What We Found

Detected (Confirmed)

  • SQL Injection — Authentication Bypass
  • SQL Injection — UNION-based Data Extraction
  • Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)
  • Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)
  • Broken Authentication — JWT Weak Secret
  • IDOR — Basket Access
  • IDOR — Order History
  • Broken Access Control — Admin Panel
  • Information Disclosure — Stack Traces
  • Security Misconfiguration — Missing Headers
  • Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Vulnerability Class

  • Critical (OWASP A03)
  • Critical (OWASP A03)
  • High (OWASP A03)
  • High (OWASP A03)
  • High (OWASP A02)
  • High (OWASP A01)
  • High (OWASP A01)
  • High (OWASP A01)
  • Medium (OWASP A05)
  • Medium (OWASP A05)
  • Medium (OWASP A10)

OWASP Top 10 Coverage

Our engine detected vulnerabilities across the OWASP Top 10 categories present in the target:

OWASP Category

  • A01: Broken Access Control
  • A02: Cryptographic Failures
  • A03: Injection
  • A05: Security Misconfiguration
  • A10: Server-Side Request Forgery

Status

  • DETECTED
  • DETECTED
  • DETECTED
  • DETECTED
  • DETECTED

The Multi-Agent Architecture

What makes this possible is not a single scanner running payloads. It is a team of 12 specialized AI agents that collaborate in real-time:

Reconnaissance
Recon Agent — endpoint discovery, technology fingerprintingScanner — parameter fuzzing, injection point identification
Attack
Attacker (STRIKER) — adaptive payload generation, chained exploitsAPI Specialist — REST/GraphQL testing, auth flow analysis
Verification
Verifier — independent confirmation, false positive eliminationCoordinator — War Room orchestration, attack chaining

Each agent reasons independently, shares findings through a shared knowledge base, and builds on each other's discoveries. When the attacker finds a potential SQL injection, the verifier independently confirms it with different payloads. When the scanner discovers an API endpoint, the API specialist tests it for authentication and authorization flaws.

Efficiency: Cost and Speed

60 min

Total Runtime

$10

Total API Cost

11 min

Time to First Finding

23

Total Findings Reported

A human pentester would take days to achieve similar coverage. A traditional automated scanner would miss the logic flaws entirely. RedVolt's AI engine delivers both — the depth of manual testing with the speed and consistency of automation.

What This Means for You

💡The Bottom Line

If your security vendor cannot show you benchmark results against standardized targets, ask yourself why. Either they have not measured their performance, or they have measured it and do not want you to see the numbers. At RedVolt, we believe transparency is not optional — it is the foundation of trust. We publish our results because hiding from your own metrics is not security — it is marketing.

We are not perfect. No security tool catches everything — and anyone who claims otherwise is lying. But we know exactly where we stand, we measure it rigorously, and we improve it with every release.

That is the difference between confidence and marketing. We have the numbers. Do they?

Try It Yourself

Want to see these results firsthand? Run a scan against your own application and see what our AI agents find. No setup required, no false promises — just real security testing with real, measurable results.

Start a Free Security Audit

Want to secure your application or smart contract?

Request an Expert Review