SAST vs SCA: where each scanner belongs

Compare static application security testing with software composition analysis, and decide which findings should block local review or CI.

Apply this guide locally Inspect product evidence

radar scan . --quick

Different risk surfaces

SAST looks at risky code patterns and data flow. SCA looks at vulnerable dependencies and lockfiles. Radar puts both lanes into one local report so reviewers do not split the decision across tools.

Guide

Evidence to inspect

Use “SAST vs SCA: where each scanner belongs” as the scope for this decision: verify the input, finding detail, workflow handoff, and product boundary before you install or buy.

CriterionEvidence to inspectBoundary

Input scopeSelected files, configuration, scan mode, and enabled rules.Only included paths and configured checks are evaluated.

Finding detailFile, line, rule ID, severity, explanation, and repair direction.Illustrative output is not a result from your repository.

Workflow handoffLocal result, report format, agent context, and optional CI signal.Enable exports or CI only when the workflow needs them.

Decision fitUse the same criteria on a real repository before choosing a plan or tool.No universal winner or guaranteed outcome is claimed.

Guide

Apply this guide locally

Use both in one gate

Block high-risk source findings and critical dependency advisories while keeping lower-risk cleanup visible for follow-up.

Official source

Primary sources

NISTSecure Software Development Framework (SSDF) 1.1
OASIS OpenSARIF 2.1.0 standard

Validate the workflow on your own code.

Apply this page’s evidence to one real repository. For “SAST vs SCA: where each scanner belongs”, confirm which finding is produced, whether the proposed next step is reproducible, and where local scanning, reports, agents, or CI should stop or expand.