Semantic Runtime Validation: prove security in execution.
Validate applications, APIs, and agentic systems by testing how they actually behave at runtime. Aptori models identities, objects, permissions, workflows, and application state—then executes the running system to prove whether security boundaries actually hold.
Prove whether application security controls actually hold at runtime.
Semantic Runtime Validation (SRV) models what an application is supposed to mean—who is acting, what they can access, which objects they own, how workflows should progress, and which state transitions should be allowed—then tests the running system to prove whether those security assumptions actually hold.
then prove in execution
Complement SAST and DAST with proof of application behavior.
SAST and DAST provide essential security signals. Semantic Runtime Validation adds application context and runtime execution to answer a different question: did the application actually violate its intended security model?
What could be wrong in code?
- Source and data-flow analysis
- Code patterns and potential paths
- Build-time visibility
- Strong for source-level weakness discovery
What looks vulnerable at runtime?
- Payload and response testing
- Endpoint and protocol behavior
- Known vulnerability patterns
- Strong for broad automated runtime coverage
Did the security model actually fail?
- Identity, object, permission, workflow and state
- Business logic and authorization semantics
- Multi-step runtime execution
- Proof of exploitability and meaningful impact
Model meaning. Execute reality. Preserve proof.
SRV turns application semantics into executable security assertions, then validates them against the running system.
Build the semantic model.
Identity, object, permission, workflow, state, API, and expected security relationship.
Create adversarial paths.
Vary actors, objects, sequence, state, inputs, privileges, and assumptions.
Execute against runtime.
Exercise the running system and determine whether the expected security boundary can be crossed.
Close with evidence.
Preserve the exploit path, root cause, remediation, and retest result.
Security assumptions only matter if they hold in execution.
Who should be able to do what, to which object, under which workflow and state.
SRV turns security assumptions into adversarial runtime actions.
The result is not another suspicion—it is reproducible proof of behavior and impact.
Security failures that emerge from application behavior.
BOLA, IDOR + access control
Validate object ownership, property access, function-level permissions, roles, and tenant boundaries.
Workflow + state abuse
Test approvals, sequence, prerequisites, transitions, quantities, and application-specific security rules.
Multi-step API behavior
Exercise chained requests, services, identities, tokens, objects, and distributed application workflows.
Users, services + agents
Validate human, machine, delegated, role, token, tenant, and agent identity context.
Sensitive exposure
Prove whether workflows expose protected records, fields, secrets, or cross-tenant information.
Chained exploitability
Connect individually valid actions when their combined behavior crosses a security boundary.
Agentic systems make semantics and runtime execution inseparable.
AI agents call tools and APIs, use delegated or machine identities, access data, change state, and chain actions dynamically. Semantic Runtime Validation evaluates the complete execution path against the intended security model.
Explore AI Security Engineer →Use runtime proof wherever application context determines risk.
API Security Testing
Validate authorization, BOLA, tenant isolation, workflow integrity, and business logic across modern APIs.
API Security Testing →Autonomous Pen Testing
Give controlled offensive agents a reliable runtime oracle for determining whether attack paths truly succeeded.
Autonomous Pen Testing →Secure by Design
Continuously test whether the controls designed into the application remain effective as software changes.
Secure by Design →Continuous Vulnerability Management
Use runtime evidence to prioritize vulnerabilities and verify that remediation closes the actual risk path.
Continuous Vulnerability Management →Semantic Runtime Validation questions.
What is Semantic Runtime Validation?
Semantic Runtime Validation is a runtime-first application security methodology that models the meaning and relationships between identities, APIs, objects, permissions, workflows, and application state, then exercises the running system to prove whether security controls can actually be bypassed.
How does Semantic Runtime Validation work?
It models expected security behavior, generates adversarial test paths, executes those paths in runtime context, confirms exploitability, preserves evidence, and retests the affected behavior after remediation.
How is Semantic Runtime Validation different from SAST and DAST?
SAST primarily analyzes code and DAST commonly probes running endpoints for vulnerability patterns. Semantic Runtime Validation models identities, objects, authorization relationships, workflows, and state, then validates whether those application semantics can be violated at runtime.
Why does Semantic Runtime Validation reduce false positives?
It does not rely solely on a suspicious pattern or theoretical path. It attempts to exercise the security condition and confirm whether the application actually permits an unauthorized or harmful outcome.
What vulnerabilities can Semantic Runtime Validation detect?
It can validate BOLA and IDOR, broken authorization, property-level access issues, workflow and state abuse, tenant-isolation failures, privilege misuse, sensitive-data exposure, and multi-step attack paths.
Can Semantic Runtime Validation test AI agents?
Yes. It can test agentic workflows where agents call tools and APIs, act through delegated or machine identities, access data, change state, and chain actions dynamically.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
