Meet 10x Pentest: Agentic Pentesting, Built on a Decade of Engagements

For the last ten years, my team and I have done one thing: break into applications before the people who mean harm get the chance to.

We have run more than 10,000 pentest engagements in that time. We've worked with over 600 companies, startups shipping their first product, banks with decades of legacy code, healthcare platforms, e-commerce giants, and infrastructure I'm not allowed to name. Across geographies, across industries, across every kind of application architecture you can imagine. That's a lot of attack surface. A lot of late nights. A lot of "wait, look at this" moments that you only earn by doing the work over and over again.

And somewhere along the way, a pattern started to bother me.

The math never worked

A good pentest takes about a week. Sometimes more. There's nothing wrong with that it's careful, skilled work, and the depth is the point. But here's the problem: software doesn't ship on a weekly cadence anymore. It ships continuously. Teams push code dozens of times a day. By the time a traditional pentest report lands, the application it describes has already changed.

So security teams are forced into a quiet compromise. You test once or twice a year, you test only the things that feel scariest, and you live with the gap in between. Not because anyone is careless, but the model simply doesn't scale to the speed of modern development. The economics of human-led testing put a ceiling on how often and how broadly you can look.

I spent a long time frustrated by that ceiling. The expertise existed. The methodology existed. We knew how to find the vulnerabilities that matter. We just couldn't do it fast enough, often enough, or widely enough to keep up.

Why most "AI security" doesn't fix this

When AI agents became genuinely capable, the obvious thought was: point them at the problem. And a lot of people did. But most of what came out of that wave shares the same flaw as the scanners that came before it: it's loud, and it's shallow. It floods you with "findings" that are theoretical at best and noise at worst. A page of severity ratings that no attacker could ever actually exploit isn't security. It's homework you have to grade.

That's the trap we were determined to avoid. The hard part of pentesting was never listing potential weaknesses. It's the judgment of knowing which ones are real, chaining them together the way an actual adversary would, and proving exploitability instead of speculating about it. That judgment is exactly what a decade of engagements teaches you, and it's exactly what naive automation throws away.

So we didn't set out to build a faster scanner. We set out to encode the way our best testers actually think.

What 10x Pentest is

Over the past several months, we've been building a platform where more than 75 agents work in parallel to find real, exploitable vulnerabilities in your applications. Not a checklist run by a single model, a coordinated swarm, each agent specialized, all of them hunting at once, reasoning about the target the way a skilled human team would if a skilled human team could be in seventy-five places at the same time.

The work that used to take us a week now takes about half a day. Same methodology. Same depth. Same standard of "is this actually exploitable, or are we just guessing?" the bar we've held for ten years. Same quality of work, delivered roughly ten times faster.

That's where the name comes from. 10x Pentest isn't a marketing number. It's the honest delta between what we could do before and what we can do now.

And critically, these agents are built to find vulnerabilities that are real and exploitable. We tuned them against everything we'd learned from those 10,000 engagements, the false positives that waste a security team's afternoon, the edge cases that scanners miss, the multi-step chains that only matter when you connect them. The agents don't hand you a pile of maybes. They hand you the things an attacker would genuinely use.

What changes when speed stops being the bottleneck

This is the part I find most exciting, and it's bigger than "faster reports."

When a pentest takes half a day instead of a week, you stop rationing it. You can test before every major release instead of twice a year. You can cover more of your surface instead of just the crown jewels. Security testing moves from a periodic event you brace for to something that keeps pace with how you actually build. The ceiling I spent years frustrated by it lifts.

That's the future we're building toward: continuous, deep, exploit-driven testing that finally matches the speed of modern software, without trading away the rigor that makes a pentest worth trusting in the first place.

This is just the beginning

Everything we've built rests on a decade of real engagements with real companies, and that foundation is exactly why I trust what we're putting out into the world. But a launch is a starting line, not a finish. The agents will keep getting sharper. The coverage will keep getting broader. And we'll keep holding ourselves to the same question we've always asked: is this real, and could someone actually use it against you?

If your software ships faster than your security testing can keep up, and for most teams, it does, I'd love for you to see what this can do. Contact us to learn more about the platform and our approach to continuous security validation.

Welcome to 10x Pentest.