Why it matters
- Unowned APIs create remediation delays and accountability gaps.
- Security teams waste time chasing developers when ownership is unclear.
- Ownership context is required for useful workflow automation.
API Ownership Mapping
Map APIs and findings to the teams responsible for fixing them.
Deterministic evidenceScope-aware executionAdaptive capability
Capability architecture
API Ownership Mapping: context, validation and evidence.
This capability contributes to the same platform outcome: understanding realistic attacker exposure and proving what matters.
ThreatCanary approach
- Infer ownership from CODEOWNERS, repository metadata, OpenAPI fields, platform tags, gateway metadata and manual overrides.
- Store ownership confidence and history in the graph.
- Route findings and drift events to the right team through integrations.
What it validates or reveals
- APIs without owners.
- Findings that need assignment.
- Ownership changes and routing confidence.
Evidence and outputs
- A clear explanation of the exposure, affected assets and likely attack path.
- Reproducible evidence suitable for analysts, developers and risk owners.
- Prioritisation based on exploitability, business impact, sensitive data and chainability.
- Owner, remediation and workflow context that can move into Jira, Slack, SIEM or reporting.
See ThreatCanary in action
Book a technical demo