Blog

A developer builds an endpoint that returns a customer’s order. It checks the session token, loads the order by the id in the URL, and returns it. Every test passes, code review approves it, and the API ships.

Nothing in that flow asks whether the order belongs to the caller. Change one digit in the id and the endpoint hands over someone else’s record, because it was never told not to.

That single missing comparison is API1 in the OWASP API Security Top 10, and it remains the most common way real APIs leak data. It also shows why API security best practices read differently from web application ones.

The vulnerability is not a payload, an encoding bug, or a missing header. It is a business rule nobody wrote down.

A build passes a deployment token into a RUN step, uses it, and deletes the file on the next line. The Dockerfile looks careful. The image is published to a public registry.

Image layers are append-only, so the delete did not remove anything. It stacked a new layer on top of the one still holding the token, and docker history reads it back in a single command.

That gap between what the Dockerfile appears to do and what the image actually contains is where most container security work lives. The runtime has a matching version of the same problem, where a flag added to make a container work in staging quietly hands it the host.

The best secure coding training platform in 2026 depends on how your developers learn and how wide your stack runs. Secure Code Warrior leads on language breadth and enterprise benchmarking. Veracode Security Labs fits teams already standardized on Veracode scanning. RansomLeak wins on exploit-then-fix depth across web, API, Git, cloud, mobile, and frontend. This roundup compares eight application security training vendors with a transparent methodology.

Updated August 2026.

Most of the EU AI Act applies to a narrow set of high-risk systems. Article 4 is the exception, because it reaches every organization that builds or uses AI, no matter how harmless the tool looks.

It has applied since 2 February 2025, well ahead of the high-risk obligations, which the Digital Omnibus pushed back to December 2027. So while teams plan for the heavier duties, the literacy clause is already live.

The EU AI Act does not ban deepfakes. It treats them as a transparency problem, so the duty is not to stop synthetic media but to make sure people know when content is artificial.

That duty lives in Article 50, and it splits the responsibility between the company that builds the generation tool and the company that publishes the result. Getting the split wrong is how a marketing clip or a training video turns into a compliance gap.