Remediation

Remediation support and retests that prove fixes held

Hands-on guidance to fix findings, verify patches, and produce delta reports for auditors and clients.

Infronest product screenshot (retest)
In short

What exactly does a re-test verify?

A re-test re-checks the specific findings from the original assessment to confirm each one is actually fixed — not that the whole application is newly perfect. The output is a clear open-versus-closed picture for those issues.

Platform

Included in the Infronest workspace

These capabilities ship in the product today—consulting adds human validation and attestation where required.

  • Automated web scanning
  • Scoped engagements
  • HTTP Lab
  • Manual & imported findings
  • Analyst workbench
  • Audit-ready reports
  • CVSS 3.1 scoring & CVE enrichment
  • OWASP & MITRE ATT&CK mapping
  • Compliance control mapping
  • Mobile app VAPT
  • CI & integrations
  • Role-based access
  • Tenant isolation
Infronest product screenshot (retest)
Capabilities

What you get

Delivered with AI-assisted engineering and human review on architecture, security, and production readiness.

  • In-platform FP workflow with required reasons
  • Workbench delta and re-scan after deploy
  • Consulting retest and attestation (L4)
  • Compliance mapping updates
  • Executive readouts
Infronest product screenshot (retest)
Workflow

What teams can do here

  1. Step 1Triage findings
  2. Step 2Assign owners
  3. Step 3Verify fixes
  4. Step 4Issue final report

How it works

  1. 01

    Triage and assign

    Findings from automated, manual and imported sources are prioritised on the analyst workbench and given owners, so each issue has a clear route to a fix.

  2. 02

    Fix with guidance

    Each finding carries remediation guidance and CVSS context. Anything believed to be a false positive is closed through a workflow that requires a documented reason, keeping the record honest.

  3. 03

    Verify the fixes

    After remediation, the same scan profile is re-run and the verification engine re-checks previously reported issues, so a closure is evidence-backed rather than assumed.

  4. 04

    Issue a delta report

    A delta report shows exactly what was closed versus what remains open since the last assessment — the artefact auditors and clients ask for. An optional consulting attestation letter follows a human re-test.

“

A worked example

Imagine a web engagement closing with one critical SQL injection, two highs and four mediums. On the workbench the critical goes to a backend engineer and the highs to the frontend lead, each carrying its CVSS vector and remediation notes. One medium turns out to be a WAF artefact and is closed as a false positive with the reason logged. When the parameterised-query fix deploys, the verification engine re-checks the injection and confirms it no longer reproduces. The delta report shows three findings moved to closed and one documented dismissal — and the client-facing attestation letter follows the certified human re-test.
A re-test re-checks the specific findings from the original assessment to confirm each one is actually fixed — not that the whole application is newly perfect. The output is a clear open-versus-closed picture for those issues.

Prove the fixes actually landed

Owner-assigned findings, evidence-backed verification and a delta report that shows open versus closed — the artefact your auditor asks for by name.