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.

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.
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

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

What teams can do here
- Step 1Triage findings
- Step 2Assign owners
- Step 3Verify fixes
- Step 4Issue final report
How it works
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Frequently asked questions
See also: VAPT product hub · Continuous / CI security · VA vs penetration testing (blog) · VAPT certification explained (blog) · Book a demo
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.








