XBOW finds. Securie proves, patches, attests, monitors — the closed loop.
XBOW raised $1B in early 2026 for autonomous offensive security. The gap: XBOW finds bugs autonomously but doesn't ship the prove → patch → attest closed loop. Securie does.
XBOW raised $1B in early 2026 for autonomous offensive security — they find bugs at scale. Buyers searching for an XBOW alternative usually hit the same wall: XBOW finds, but the patch + attest + monitor loop is missing. Securie solves the closed-loop directly.
Why people leave XBOW
- XBOW finds bugs but doesn't fix them — manual patch work continues
- No attestation chain — auditor still asks how you know it's fixed
- Offensive-only — no continuous-defensive monitoring
- No specialist depth on Supabase RLS / vibe-coder stacks specifically
Where XBOW actually breaks down
No auto-fix PR
Example: XBOW's deliverable is a vulnerability report. The patch is your engineering team's work.
Impact: Engineering velocity tax: every finding becomes a sprint ticket.
No attestation chain
Example: Auditor asks 'how do you know this was fixed?' XBOW report alone is not auditor-evidence.
Impact: SOC 2 + EU AI Act evidence requires separate tooling on top.
No vibe-coder depth
Example: Lovable BOLA + Supabase RLS + .claude/ credential leaks are AI-native bug classes XBOW's generic offensive doesn't target.
Impact: April 2026 incident wave caught XBOW + Snyk + Semgrep; Securie's specialists catch this class structurally.
Enterprise-only pricing
Example: $100K+ ARR typical engagement.
Impact: Solo founders + indie hackers are priced out.
Why Securie instead
Closed-loop prove → patch → attest
Every Securie finding gets a sandbox-proof + auto-fix PR + DSSE-signed attestation. XBOW gives you a bug; Securie gives you a fix + auditor evidence.
AI-built-app specialist depth
Supabase RLS specialist + Lovable BOLA detection + .claude/ credential leak — XBOW's generalist offensive coverage misses these.
Continuous monitoring
Securie's continuous-scan re-runs nightly against new CVEs + runtime alerts. XBOW is one-shot offensive.
Feature matrix — XBOW vs Securie
| Area | XBOW | Securie |
|---|---|---|
| Bug discovery | Autonomous offensive (their core) | Specialist fleet + sandbox-verify (prove-don't-flag) |
| Auto-fix PR | No | Yes — one-tap GitHub Suggested Change |
| Attestation chain | No | DSSE-signed in-toto v1 + Sigstore rekor |
| Continuous monitoring | Engagement-bound | Continuous-scan nightly + runtime correlation |
| Supabase RLS specialist | No | Yes — first-class |
| AI-coding-tool credential scanning | No | Yes — secret_scanner + secrets-lifecycle |
| EU AI Act AIBOM | No | Yes — CycloneDX 1.6 |
| Pricing — Solo founder | Not available | $49/mo |
| Pricing — Indie | Not available | $12/mo |
| Pricing — Enterprise | $100K+ ARR | Custom |
The deeper tradeoff
XBOW's bet is autonomous offensive at scale: find more bugs, faster, cheaper than human red-teamers. The bet works for the segment that has the engineering capacity to act on findings + the budget to engage. The gap — and the buying signal that drives 'XBOW alternative' searches — is everything that comes after a finding lands.
A finding is not a fix. A fix is not auditor-evidence. Auditor-evidence is not continuous monitoring. The closed-loop spans all four; XBOW ships one. For an enterprise with a dedicated AppSec team, this is acceptable — the team handles the rest. For everyone else, the gap is the product.
Securie's structural difference is the prove-don't-flag invariant + the attestation chain. Every Securie finding ships with a sandbox proof (the bug actually works in a sandboxed copy of your app), a one-tap fix PR, and a DSSE-signed attestation. The auditor verifies the chain with cosign verify-blob — no human assertion required.
The specialist fleet is the second axis. XBOW's offensive is generalist; Securie's specialists target the AI-built-app bug classes (Supabase RLS, BOLA on browser-to-REST, .claude/.cursor/.continue/ credential leaks, prompt injection). The April 2026 incident wave (Lovable BOLA, Bitwarden CLI hijack, Anthropic MCP RCE) hit exactly the bug classes Securie targets specifically.
The pricing axis is third. XBOW's enterprise-only model excludes the indie-and-startup segment that produces the most AI-built-app bugs. Securie's $12-$299 tier ladder addresses this directly.
Pricing
XBOW pricing is enterprise-only ($100K+ ARR typical). Securie Indie tier: $12/mo. Solo Founder: $49/mo. The Securie offensive swarm SKU ($15/run, à la carte) covers what XBOW does at a fraction of the cost for the bounded-scope use case.
Migration path
- Install Securie GitHub App + Vercel deploy-gate
- Disable XBOW autonomous offense (or keep as supplement to Securie's offensive swarm SKU)
- Run Securie's specialist fleet on every PR — replaces XBOW's 'find a bug' output with 'find + fix' output
Extended migration playbook
Step 1: Inventory XBOW findings
What: Export all open XBOW findings from your engagement.
Why: Cross-reference with Securie scan output to ensure 100% migration coverage.
Gotchas: XBOW report formats change per engagement; preserve the raw before processing.
Step 2: Install Securie GitHub App
What: One-click on every repo XBOW covered.
Why: Securie's per-PR coverage replaces XBOW's batch-engagement output.
Gotchas: Some XBOW findings require host-level scope outside Securie's PR-time coverage; for those, use Securie's offensive swarm SKU.
Step 3: Wire Securie deploy-gate
What: Add the Vercel / Netlify / Cloudflare integration.
Why: Closes the 'merged but not deployed' gap XBOW doesn't cover.
Gotchas: Configure fail-closed behavior — unknown commit = block deploy.
Step 4: Configure offensive swarm SKU (optional)
What: If your XBOW engagement included autonomous offensive, configure Securie's offensive swarm with equivalent rules of engagement.
Why: Closes the offensive coverage XBOW provided.
Gotchas: Define ROE explicitly — Securie's OffensiveRoe newtype refuses unscoped scope.
Pick Securie if…
AI-built-app teams wanting closed-loop with auto-fix + auditor evidence.
Stay with XBOW if…
Enterprises with dedicated red-team budget who want autonomous offensive without integrated defense.
Common questions during evaluation
Does Securie do autonomous offensive like XBOW?
Yes — the offensive swarm SKU. Sandbox-scoped per ADR-007 + scope-locked via OffensiveRoe newtype + bounded by FAIR-engine ALE. Available à la carte at $15/run.
Can I run Securie + XBOW in parallel?
Yes. Securie's PR-time + deploy-gate + continuous-scan layers run alongside XBOW's autonomous engagement. Most teams sunset XBOW once Securie's specialist depth + offensive swarm cover the same surface.
What about bug-bounty programs (HackerOne / Bugcrowd)?
Independent of XBOW — Securie complements bug-bounty by closing the bug-class catalog before bounty hunters find issues. Both layers stay valuable.
How do I justify the cost difference to my CFO?
Securie at $299/mo Startup tier vs XBOW at $100K+ ARR is two orders of magnitude. Add the auto-fix PR + auditor attestation savings (no separate tooling needed) and the ROI is straightforward.
Does Securie find zero-days like XBOW claims?
Securie's specialist fleet finds the AI-built-app bug classes that produce the actual breaches in 2026 (Lovable BOLA, .claude/ credential leaks). The 'zero-day' framing is XBOW's marketing; the structural risk is the bug-class catalog.
Is Securie ready for enterprise deployment?
Yes — TEE / Customer-VPC / on-prem-air-gapped tiers ship at launch. SOC 2 Type II in progress. EU AI Act ready.
Verdict
XBOW is the right tool for enterprises with dedicated red-team budget + engineering capacity to act on autonomous-offensive findings. Securie is the right tool for everyone else: closed-loop coverage, AI-built-app specialist depth, auto-fix PRs, auditor attestation chain, and pricing that reaches indie hackers + startups. If you're searching for an XBOW alternative, the gap you're feeling is the closed loop — that's Securie's product.