exploreAIExplore
How to Use Aikido Security for Runtime protection alert handling
Learn Aikido Security runtime protection alert handling with step by step workflows, realistic examples, and verified plan notes.
Aikido Security works well for runtime protection alert handling when you run it like production work: locked brief, SOURCE facts, then review before publish. Aikido Security is a unified AppSec platform covering code, cloud, and runtime with SAST, open-source dependency scanning (SCA), secrets detection, Autofix, cloud/container scanning, AI pentesting, and runtime protection. Start for free at app.aikido.dev; confirm live plans on aikido.dev/pricing. Start at /explore/aikido-security.
This guide focuses on runtime protection alert handling in detail. Related Aikido Security articles: /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-static-code-analysis-sast-triage, /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-open-source-dependency-scanning-sca, /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-secrets-detection-follow-up.
When this workflow is the right job
Use runtime protection alert handling when the deliverable is specifically this Aikido Security job. Switch to static code analysis (sast) triage when that workflow already owns the asset.
Step by step workflow
1. Brief Runtime protection alert handling
Write what must stay true for runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security before settings or spend.
Brief: Runtime protection alert handling Keep: verified SOURCE facts only Avoid: invented pricing or features Success: one reviewable output
2. Open Aikido Security for Runtime protection alert handling
Use the Aikido Security surface that owns runtime protection alert handling. Do not mix a neighboring workflow in the same pass.
Surface: Runtime protection alert handling Start: pilot with one representative input Plans: www.aikido.dev/pricing
3. Pilot Runtime protection alert handling
Run a single runtime protection alert handling pilot. Score clarity, grounding, and whether the output is reviewable.
Pilot: Runtime protection alert handling [ ] SOURCE facts match [ ] Output reviewable [ ] Settings logged
4. Refine Runtime protection alert handling
Change one runtime protection alert handling dimension only. Save a template from the best run.
Refine: Runtime protection alert handling Change: one control only Keep: SOURCE and success criteria
Practical runtime protection alert handling examples
Repo allowlist
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Repo allowlist". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Repo allowlist with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Repo allowlist - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Repo allowlist: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
IDE Autofix preview
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "IDE Autofix preview". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for IDE Autofix preview with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for IDE Autofix preview - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for IDE Autofix preview: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
IaC drift
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "IaC drift". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for IaC drift with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for IaC drift - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for IaC drift: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
VM reachability
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "VM reachability". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for VM reachability with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for VM reachability - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for VM reachability: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Bot protection alert
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Bot protection alert". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Bot protection alert with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Bot protection alert - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Bot protection alert: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Report export
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Report export". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Report export with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Report export - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Report export: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Owner assignment
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Owner assignment". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Owner assignment with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Owner assignment - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Owner assignment: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
SLA for critical
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "SLA for critical". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for SLA for critical with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for SLA for critical - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for SLA for critical: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Retest after fix
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Retest after fix". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Retest after fix with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Retest after fix - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Retest after fix: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
SAST SQL injection
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "SAST SQL injection". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for SAST SQL injection with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for SAST SQL injection - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for SAST SQL injection: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
SCA CVE triage
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "SCA CVE triage". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for SCA CVE triage with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for SCA CVE triage - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for SCA CVE triage: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Secret in CI log
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Secret in CI log". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Secret in CI log with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Secret in CI log - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Secret in CI log: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Autofix PR review
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Autofix PR review". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Autofix PR review with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Autofix PR review - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Autofix PR review: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Cloud attack path
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Cloud attack path". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Cloud attack path with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Cloud attack path - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Cloud attack path: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Container CVE
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Container CVE". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Container CVE with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Container CVE - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Container CVE: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
K8s misconfig
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "K8s misconfig". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for K8s misconfig with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for K8s misconfig - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for K8s misconfig: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Pentest finding
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Pentest finding". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Pentest finding with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Pentest finding - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Pentest finding: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Runtime injection block
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Runtime injection block". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Runtime injection block with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Runtime injection block - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Runtime injection block: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Noise filter note
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Noise filter note". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Noise filter note with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Noise filter note - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Noise filter note: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
False positive mark
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "False positive mark". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for False positive mark with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for False positive mark - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for False positive mark: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
Severity reorder
Scenario: A security or engineering owner triages Runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security for finding "Severity reorder". Objective: Produce a remediation-ready write-up for Severity reorder with severity, owner, and verify steps. Inputs: - Finding metadata for Severity reorder - Repo/service scope - Environment (dev/stage/prod) - Acceptable fix patterns Workflow: Open finding → Validate true positive → Assign owner → Autofix or manual patch plan → Retest in Aikido Security → Close or accept risk with ticket Requirements: - Stay within verified Aikido Security capabilities; do not invent features. - Confirm live plan notes on www.aikido.dev/pricing before promising volume. - Change one variable between iterations. - Human-review before external publish, send, billing, or clinical/legal use. - Do not mark fixed without retest evidence. Expected output: A ticket-ready Runtime protection alert handling note for Severity reorder: severity, fix plan, retest result, and residual risk.
How to improve runtime protection alert handling
Cut noise from runtime protection alert handling by removing extra adjectives while preserving SOURCE facts in Aikido Security.
Raise quality by insisting on a single success check before debating style.
Make review easier by labeling fields that must never change.
Speed iteration by cloning the last good run and altering only one control.
Stabilize outputs by pinning settings after the pilot is approved.
Reduce rework by rejecting drafts that invent claims.
Improve handoffs by recording which control produced the best result.
Harden the workflow by testing an incomplete input before trusting defaults.
Prompting and usage guidance
Name the runtime protection alert handling job, audience, and success check before opening Aikido Security.
Paste only verified facts under SOURCE so Aikido Security cannot invent details.
Specify the deliverable shape up front.
Call out fixed details versus flexible style choices.
Ask Aikido Security to flag unsupported claims before you accept the draft.
Limitations to respect
Check Aikido Security plan gates for runtime protection alert handling on www.aikido.dev/pricing before you promise timelines.
Keep drafts unpublished until a human confirms SOURCE facts.
Aikido Security can be wrong. Treat runtime protection alert handling as provisional until review.
If documentation is silent on a claim, leave it out rather than guessing.
Practical tips for this workflow
Pilot once before batching runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security.
Keep a reusable template with variables for runtime protection alert handling.
Separate creative instructions from SOURCE facts.
Log settings from the best run.
Common mistakes
- Skipping the pilot run before scaling volume
- Inventing pricing, quotas, or features not on official pages
- Mixing unrelated workflows in one session
- Publishing without a human review gate
Treat runtime protection alert handling in Aikido Security as a production workflow: brief, pilot, refine, then ship with review. Related reading: /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-static-code-analysis-sast-triage, /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-open-source-dependency-scanning-sca, /blog/how-to-use-aikido-security-for-secrets-detection-follow-up.