Platform
Services
Solutions
Resources
Company
success case
Driva
Driva is a Brazilian AI-first startup serving high-end clients. When its manual pentest cycle stretched to three months, it became clear the approach had to move at the same speed as the rest of the business.
With Conviso's Autonomous AI Pentest, work that used to take months was completed in minutes, with a technical depth that surprised the security team itself and a remediation cycle powered by the company's own internal AI agents.
28
vulnerabilities identified in minutes
0
remaining vulnerabilities confirmed in the retest
Compliance
report accepted as evidence in enterprise deals
1 person
ran what used to take a whole team
From 3 months
to minutes
A cycle that used to take three months manually was completed in minutes, with comparable scope and more depth than expected.
Depth that overcame skepticism
The security lead admitted being skeptical about an AI pentest. After the run, he was surprised by how deep the findings went.
.svg)
Output that feeds the internal AI cycle
Conviso's report was used directly as input for Driva's internal AI agents to resolve the findings.
Autonomous AI Pentest
Run real-world attack simulations, identify vulnerabilities, and receive a severity-prioritized list of findings, complete with technical evidence, proof of concept, documented attack chains, and a full history for continuous retesting.
The same solution Driva used, ready to plug directly into your company's development lifecycle.
The challenge
Driva had run a pentest before. Done in-house, following the standard step-by-step process, it took about three months from start to finish, from planning to the final report with every fix applied. The report was useful for a while, but it had a limit: for some enterprise clients, a pentest run by the company's own team was not enough as evidence.
The company needed an approach that kept the technical depth but matched the pace of an AI-first startup: fast, priced for its stage, and able to produce documentation recognized by third parties.
Main areas of concern
Manual pentest cycle took up to 3 months from start to finish
In-house report was not enough for every enterprise client
Cost and speed out of step with a startup's stage
I'll admit I was a bit skeptical about this AI pentest. But I saw that it went really deep. It reached services I honestly didn't think it would.
Bergson Martins, Security, Driva
The pentest journey with Conviso
Conviso ran a training session with the Driva team to align scope and setup. Bergson took direct ownership of the Conviso Platform, while Wagner followed the reports and made the calls on what to test and when to run it.
The findings went to the development team, which applied the fixes with help from the company's internal AI agents. The retest confirmed the result: no remaining vulnerabilities.
The engagement included:
The engagement included:
Differentiators recognized by Driva
1
Speed that changes the logic of the security cycle
With AI-powered pentesting, the human process became the bottleneck, not the test itself.
The team took longer to read the reports and hand them off to development than the AI took to find the problems.
Running the pentest and seeing the results was much faster than what we did last year. The human process became the bottleneck.
Wagner Agostinho, CTO, Driva
2
Startup-friendly cost, enterprise-grade depth
Wagner got quotes from several pentest companies. He found cheaper options, but none with the same depth as Conviso.
That balance between cost and results is what made sense for a bootstrapped startup serving high-end clients.
A pentest that used to need several people can now be run by one developer and a very well-trained AI. The cost makes a lot of sense, and so does the speed.
Wagner Agostinho, CTO, Driva
3
Real depth, with step-by-step evidence and governance
Bergson came into the process skeptical. In his view, an AI pentest could be shallow. What he found was different: the pentest went deep into services he didn't expect it to cover, with findings ranging from simple vulnerabilities to more complex issues that were genuinely worth fixing.
For every finding, the platform delivered steps to reproduce, so Bergson could confirm the issue was real before handing it to development. On top of that, the Conviso Platform provides governance over findings: you can rank them by severity, set remediation deadlines, and track everything to the end without losing sight of anything.
It gives you the steps to reproduce. I can rule out false positives. And on the governance side, we can prioritize by severity and track every fix through to the end.
Bergson Martins, Security, Driva
4
A report that feeds straight into the internal AI cycle
For an AI-first company, a tool's output has to be good enough to feed other automated processes.
Conviso's report passed that test: the development team took the findings, fed them into the company's internal AI agents, and used the output to guide the fixes, with no manual rework along the way.
I have no doubt we used the tool's output as input for our AI to solve things. Naturally, nothing came up in the retest.
Wagner Agostinho, CTO, Driva
Results Achieved
The cycle closed with no remaining vulnerabilities.
The report is now used in compliance processes with enterprise clients: when a client asks for proof of a pentest performed in the last year, with a record of the findings and the fixes applied, Driva can present even more complete documentation.
A good tool for a manager is one you don't have to keep watching all the time. Bergson ran most of the process on his own, and I saw the part that mattered: the reports and the compliance.
Wagner Agostinho, CTO, Driva