Platform

Platform overview How it works Authorization testing Evidence & reports Private scanning Integrations

Solutions

Security agencies Product teams Regulated industries Partner programme

Learn

Blog Knowledge hub Compare

Resources

Pricing Documentation Help centre FAQ Security & data What we haven’t proved

Company

About Contact Careers Sign in to the platform Start a $199 pilot →

Home / Knowledge hub / Findings export

Knowledge hub

Findings export

Sending findings into your ticketing or tracking tools so fixes get owned.

Illustration explaining Findings export

What it means

A findings export is the step that moves security findings out of a report and into the tools your team already uses to track work: a ticket system, an issue tracker, a spreadsheet or a dashboard. Each finding becomes an item with an owner and a status.

Common formats include CSV files, JSON, and SARIF, an open standard for static analysis results. The format matters less than what travels with the finding. An item with no steps to reproduce it is just another vague ticket. Include the evidence, the severity and a stable ID, so the same finding is never created twice.

Why it matters

Reports get read once and filed. Tickets get assigned, discussed and closed. If findings stay in a PDF, a fix depends on someone remembering to copy each one by hand, and the important ones are usually the hardest to describe in a hurry.

An export also gives you numbers you can manage. How many open findings are older than their deadline? Which team owns most of them? That is the data behind remediation SLAs and the average time to remediate. Without an export, none of those numbers exists.

How it shows up

You meet it as a button, an integration or a script that creates one ticket per finding. A useful ticket carries a title a developer understands, the severity, the affected endpoint or file, reproduction steps, the evidence, and a link back to the full finding.

Mistakes repeat. Dumping every low-value item into the backlog so the serious ones drown. Creating duplicates each time a test re-runs. Losing the link between ticket and finding, so a closed ticket does not close the finding. Close the loop in both directions: a ticket is done when a retest confirms the fix, not when someone clicks a box.

Questions people ask

Findings export, answered

What format should a findings export use?

Whatever your tracker accepts. CSV works for spreadsheets, JSON for scripts and integrations, and SARIF for tools that already read static analysis output.

Pick the format that preserves the evidence and the finding's unique ID.

Should every finding become a ticket?

Not necessarily. Informational notes can stay in the report. Real vulnerabilities should become tracked work with an owner and a deadline.

Agree a threshold, such as severity and confidence, so the backlog stays useful.

How do we avoid duplicate tickets?

Give each finding a stable ID and have the export check for an existing ticket before creating a new one. Without that, every re-test floods the tracker.

See also finding deduplication.

Who should own an exported finding?

The team that owns the code or service, not the security team. Security owns the process and the check that the fix worked.

Route by repository, service or component, so each ticket lands with someone able to change it.

How do we know a ticket is really fixed?

A closed ticket only means someone believes it is done. Confirm it by repeating the original steps against the new code and recording the result.

That is the idea behind a closed-loop retest.

Cyberlop mark

Can a developer act on the ticket?

Each of our findings carries the request, the response, a screenshot where a person can see it and the line of code, so a ticket made from it is something a developer can reproduce. Book a pilot on one app.

Or start with a $199 pilot on one application: thirty days, success criteria agreed before day one, credited against the annual if you convert.