Manual, OWASP-aligned assessment of your custom web applications. We test what scanners cannot reach: authentication flows, authorization decisions, business logic, and the modern web risks that live in single-page apps and complex client-side code.
If your application processes sensitive data, supports customer transactions, or holds an account that matters to your business, an automated scan is not enough. Real web application testing requires a human who understands the business and the code.
Automated web application scanners can identify common, generic vulnerabilities: known injection patterns, missing security headers, outdated libraries. What they cannot do is understand what your application is for, how authorization is supposed to work, what business logic the application enforces, or which workflows produce real impact when abused.
Our work covers everything in the OWASP Testing Guide and OWASP ASVS, applied with the depth real-world threat actors bring. We chain weaknesses to demonstrate end-to-end impact, abuse business logic in ways the application's authors did not anticipate, and validate that authorization holds up under hostile pressure across every role and every endpoint.
Injection (SQLi, NoSQLi, command injection, SSTI), broken access control, cryptographic failures, server-side request forgery, identification and authentication failures, software and data integrity failures, insecure deserialization, and the rest of the OWASP Top 10 categories. We go beyond the surface: every category has a specific attack tree we walk through manually.
The single largest category of real-world breaches that scanners cannot find. We map your application's workflows, identify state transitions and trust boundaries, and test what happens when steps are reordered, skipped, or replayed.
Login flows, password reset flows, multi-factor authentication implementations, JWT and token handling, OAuth and SSO integrations, session fixation, and authentication bypass paths. We test what happens at every step and what tokens carry which authority.
Role-based and attribute-based access control across every endpoint, every parameter, and every role combination. Insecure direct object reference (IDOR), horizontal and vertical privilege escalation, multi-tenancy isolation bypass.
DOM-based XSS, CSP bypass, client-side trust assumptions, JavaScript framework-specific risks, and the increasing attack surface in modern single-page applications and progressive web apps.
The most common path to remote code execution in modern applications. We test upload validation, MIME-type bypass, server-side processing, and any document or import pipeline that touches user-supplied data.
Most modern web apps are thin clients over an API. We test those APIs in this scope when they support the application directly. If you have separate public APIs, our API Penetration Testing service covers those in depth.
Active testing typically runs one to three weeks depending on application complexity and the number of distinct user roles. Most engagements are gray-box: we work with one or more provided test accounts at each privilege level so we can exercise the full application without spending half the engagement on credential attacks.
The engagement follows our standard five-phase methodology. Critical findings are escalated immediately rather than held for the final report.
Code review is a separate, deeper engagement we offer when requested. Standard web application testing is black-box or gray-box, working from outside the code. For applications handling especially sensitive data, code-assisted testing combines both perspectives.
Pre-production environments are ideal: same code, fewer concerns about disrupting users or data. If we test against production, we coordinate carefully and avoid destructive techniques. Both can produce equally valid results when scoped correctly.
Yes. For SaaS and multi-tenant applications, validating tenant-to-tenant isolation is one of the highest-value parts of the engagement. We test for cross-tenant data exposure, privilege escalation between tenants, and information leakage.
A bug bounty is unscoped, unscheduled, and reports come from researchers with varying skill and incentive. A penetration test is scoped, scheduled, methodical, and accountable. Both are valuable; they answer different questions. Most clients use both.
Test as early as possible. Findings caught in pre-launch testing are an order of magnitude cheaper to fix than findings caught after public release. We will scope to what is testable and flag where additional testing is recommended once development is complete.
Tell us about the application, your timeline, and any compliance drivers. We will respond within one business day with a scoping call.