Your organization might face unknown vulnerabilities from API security scanning. In fact, the average company now has over 10,000 APIs across their infrastructure. And since many of these are insecure...well, this could be a problem.

And to think, we were worried about IoT.

This massive API attack surface needs robust protection. Unfortunately, most security teams don’t really seem to know the best ways to do that, often using security tools that just don’t work.

For example, they may run security tests too late in development cycles, leaving minimal time to fix issues. That’s assuming, of course, that the scans even catch issues. Sometimes, current scanning methods fail to catch critical problems. These include undocumented "zombie" APIs and code generated through AI assistance.

From a numbers standpoint, the stakes are high - GDPR fines can reach up to 20 million euros, or 4% of annual global turnover (whichever is greater). Fines in the U.S. vary by state, but it’s not unusual to see them reach up to half a million dollars.

This piece dives into these security blind spots. We'll explore why they happen, and why traditional methods don't work well enough. You'll learn how smart, continuous scanning strategies protect your digital assets before attackers discover weaknesses.

‍

How API blind spots form in modern development

Modern API landscapes look more like a complex maze than a well-laid-out network. This complexity creates dangerous blind spots that even sophisticated API security scanning solutions miss.

‍

Lack of visibility across environments

Many (maybe even most) enterprises lack a clear picture of their API ecosystem. A recent survey showed that 78% of decision-makers don't even know how many APIs they have. It also revealed that organizations often find many more APIs than expected during discovery exercises. Some companies found close to 30,000 APIs when they thought they had only about 100.

The visibility gap gets worse with multi-cloud environments, where security teams are unable to get a clear view of different architectures, components, and protocols. Cloud initiatives keep growing, and a typical organization now uses more than 1,200 cloud-based applications (just in case you were wondering why an organization might have 10,000 APIs…that’s why). While we can’t blame anyone for having blind spots in that kind of an environment, it doesn’t change a fundamental truth: You simply can't protect what you can't see.

‍

Untracked changes from AI-assisted coding

AI-assisted development tools have sped up code creation, but also brought new security risks. Studies show that since AI coding assistants became popular, there has been a a 300% increase in repositories containing personally identifiable information (PII) and a 1000% surge in APIs with missing authorization and input validation.

AI tools make it easy to generate, modify, and deploy APIs at scale, but these AI assistants don't understand organizational risk policies, and often copy insecure patterns from their training data. The sad reality is that this practice, along with the lack of landscape knowledge, creates a gap between what's deployed and what teams actually understand, and that gap creates major security vulnerabilities.

‍

Shadow and zombie APIs from legacy systems

Two dangerous API types exist in most organizations: shadow APIs and zombie APIs. Developers create shadow APIs without proper oversight when they need quick solutions for pressing deadlines. Zombie APIs are old, abandoned interfaces that still work.

Both types create serious security threats:

• Shadow APIs lack documentation, security measures, and proper integration with existing systems
• Zombie APIs may contain outdated libraries and lack security updates
• Both stay invisible to traditional API security tools

Research shows that 74% of decision-makers report that over 20% of their organization's APIs are unmanaged. To put that in perspective, that means that nearly 15% of all APIs in use are unmanaged. These unmanaged interfaces often become an organization's biggest attack vector, because they operate outside standard security protocols.

Think about it this way: Would you trust an airport’s security if 15% of its entrances were unprotected? Would you get into a car that had a 15% chance of exploding when you turned the ignition?

This mismanagement comes in many forms, from forgotten legacy assets and old development workarounds to overlooked systems from acquisitions. However, the end result is the same. Without strong API security scanning across environments, these blind spots will grow and become prime targets for attackers.

Boom…..

Where traditional API scanning falls short

Traditional security tools don't deal very well with API security challenges. These old tools leave big gaps in protection that expose organizations to sophisticated threats.

‍

Limitations of static and dynamic testing

Regular application security testing tools weren't built to catch API-specific vulnerabilities. Static Application Security Testing (SAST) fails to spot API-specific problems, like authentication flaws and authorization issues. SAST can't understand runtime interactions and business logic specific to APIs, which makes it nowhere near as effective against ground API attacks.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) has major challenges too. Since you can't crawl an API, DAST's black-box approach doesn't give full coverage. Without a proper API inventory, DAST tools can't find existing APIs or know where to start testing. These tools end up guessing.

‍

Fragmented tools and siloed data

The DevSecOps lifecycle has too many point solutions that create dangerous visibility gaps. Teams can't identify and fix risks easily when vulnerability management tools work in isolation. A study shows that more than 40% of CISOs report that analysis is time-consuming and managing alerts from different tools needs too much work.

This scattered approach creates confusion in threat classification. One tool might label an event "low risk," while another sees similar activity as "high risk." Team members waste time trying to make sense of conflicting data when they could be fixing actual threats. And, of course, there’s always our dear friend, Alert Fatigue.

‍

Missed business logic vulnerabilities

Business logic vulnerabilities are the most dangerous blind spot in API security. These vulnerabilities are exceptionally hard to spot because they exploit the application's expected operations. They seem especially eager to pop up when there's poor validation or wrong assumptions about user behavior.

These vulnerabilities cause special problems:

• They get past traditional security measures like firewalls and encryption
• Automated scanning tools can't catch them
• They require a deep understand of application-specific workflows
• APIs don't have user interfaces that could add extra control layers

Regular tools miss these issues because they can't grasp the business context of applications. Fixing business logic vulnerabilities often means changing the application's core logic, which takes time and gets complicated. Critical vulnerabilities will stay hidden until organizations use specialized API security scanning solutions...or, you know, someone exploits them.

‍

How blind spots grow over time

API blind spots grow slowly as development continues. Security tools cannot prevent these vulnerabilities from multiplying in predictable ways that put your security at risk.

‍

Delayed testing in CI/CD pipelines

Development cycles often neglect security testing. Typically, testing happens late in development, often right before deployment, leaving insufficient time for remediation. Teams rushing to meet deadlines make this worse by setting aside security checks.

Security teams face a tough choice between meeting deadlines and fixing vulnerabilities they find right before deployment. This creates bottlenecks. Each development cycle adds more unsolved security issues that widen the gaps in API security.

‍

Alert fatigue and poorly prioritized risks

Security teams face a flood of alerts that creates another growing blind spot. Studies show security teams receive hundreds of alerts daily, with more than half being false positives. This constant stream of alerts creates several problems:

• Teams ignore or delay critical alerts because they become numb to warnings
• Nobody can tell high-risk alerts from low-risk ones
• 55% of respondents report missing critical alerts on a weekly or even daily basis

Teams misunderstand vulnerabilities without proper context and fail to prioritize fixes correctly. Over time, security teams stop treating alerts as important, further reducing their response rate.

‍

Compliance drift and undocumented changes

APIs rarely maintain their initial compliance status. Engineers continue iterating, and small changes accumulate into significant compliance drift. AI-assisted development makes this worse because code generation moves faster than documentation.

Teams document API changes less often as development speeds up, which means security teams cannot see evolving risks. And without regular audits and compliance checks in CI/CD processes, security gaps widen further.

Organizations need continuous API discovery to prevent these growing blind spots. Regular third-party audits and integrated compliance monitoring help identify changes from established specifications.

‍

Fixing blind spots with smarter API security scans

API protection needs a complete rethinking of traditional scanning approaches. Thankfully, we already have a model: defense-in-depth. Just as strong security requires multi-layered defense, leading organizations have begun using multi-layered strategies when discovering and fixing blind spots in their APIs. These strategies combine continuous discovery, proactive testing, and contextual risk assessment.

‍

Using AI for continuous API discovery

AI-powered scanning marks a fundamental change in API security capabilities. Traditional tools fall short while AI improves threat detection through machine learning algorithms that analyze large amounts of API traffic and spot suspicious patterns. These advanced systems set baseline behaviors for normal API activity and flag deviations that might signal security threats.

Modern AI-driven discovery tools can spot APIs in a variety of environments—including shadow and zombie APIs that often go unnoticed. These tools monitor API traffic non-stop and detect unauthorized endpoints deployed without central oversight. This reduces blind spots in your security posture.

‍

Integrating shift-left and shift-right practices

Complete API security needs preventative and reactive approaches to work together:

• Shift-left practices embed security testing early in the development cycle. Teams can spot vulnerabilities when fixes are less pricey. Organizations detect security issues before code reaches production by adding automated API testing to CI/CD pipelines.
• Shift-right practices keep an eye on production environments through continuous monitoring and logging. This approach recognizes that some vulnerabilities only surface after deployment.

The best strategy combines both approaches to create a continuous feedback loop between development and production. It saves money on the long run, increases security in the software, and builds consumer confidence. What’s not to like?

‍

Prioritizing risks with business context

Most scanning tools treat all vulnerabilities alike—yet vulnerabilities don't pose equal risk. Smart API security uses contextual information to rank remediation efforts:

Business impact scoring looks at factors like internet exposure, sensitive data handling, and revenue implications. This context-aware approach helps teams pick their battles wisely and invest resources for maximum security benefit. Teams can tackle their biggest risks first by understanding both technical vulnerabilities and business impact.

‍

Conclusion

API security blind spots pose threats to organizations whatever their size or industry. This piece shows how these dangerous gaps develop within modern development environments, especially when you have limited visibility in multiple cloud deployments. On top of that, it shows how AI-assisted coding has sped up development while bringing new vulnerabilities that traditional scanning tools can't detect.

Today's complex API ecosystems need more than traditional security approaches. Static and dynamic testing tools can't handle API-specific vulnerabilities well. Security solutions work in isolation and create data silos that slow down threat response. Business logic vulnerabilities remain tough to spot without specialized tools that understand the application's context.

These blind spots grow larger as time passes. Security gaps keep widening due to delayed testing in CI/CD pipelines, overwhelmed security teams, and undocumented changes. So your organization becomes more vulnerable with each development cycle unless you put detailed scanning strategies in place.

Smart, continuous API security practices offer the answer. AI-powered discovery tools can find shadow and zombie APIs that regular scanning misses. A combination of shift-left and shift-right practices will give strong security feedback loop throughout development. Your security resources should target the most critical vulnerabilities first by prioritizing risks based on business context.

Your API security strategy needs to go beyond basic scanning to welcome continuous discovery and contextual risk assessment. The challenges may be huge, but these advanced approaches will protect your digital assets before attackers exploit gaps that traditional tools miss.

‍

FAQs

Q1. What are API blind spots and why are they dangerous? API blind spots are vulnerabilities in an organization's API infrastructure that go undetected by traditional security measures. They're dangerous because they can lead to serious data breaches, compliance violations, and potential financial losses if exploited by attackers.

Q2. How do AI-assisted coding tools impact API security? AI-assisted coding tools can inadvertently introduce security risks by generating code that may contain vulnerabilities or replicate insecure patterns. They've been associated with increases in APIs containing personally identifiable information and lacking proper authorization and input validation.

Q3. What are shadow and zombie APIs? Shadow APIs are created without proper oversight, often by developers seeking quick solutions. Zombie APIs are deprecated or abandoned interfaces that remain operational. Both types lack proper security measures and documentation, making them significant security threats.

Q4. Why do traditional API security scanning methods fall short? Traditional scanning methods often fail to detect API-specific vulnerabilities, struggle with understanding business logic, and can't effectively crawl APIs. They also tend to operate in silos, creating fragmented data that makes comprehensive risk assessment difficult.

Q5. How can organizations improve their API security scanning strategy? Organizations can enhance their API security by implementing AI-powered continuous discovery tools, integrating both shift-left and shift-right security practices, and prioritizing risks based on business context. This approach provides more comprehensive coverage and focuses resources on the most critical vulnerabilities.