Testing that behaves like a real attacker.
Scanners find what scanners find. Our VAPT engagements are manual and exploit-driven — we chain small weaknesses into real attack paths, prove the business impact with working proofs of concept, and then verify your fixes actually held.
Not a scanner report with a logo on it.
Automated tools are part of our kit, but they're the start of a test, not the deliverable. The findings that hurt — broken object-level authorization, business-logic abuse, privilege escalation chains, tenant isolation failures — only surface when a human thinks about how your system is supposed to work and then makes it do something else.
Every finding we report has been exploited by us first. If we can't demonstrate impact, we say so honestly instead of padding the severity.
What we test
- Web applications — authentication and session flows, access control (IDOR/BOLA), injection, business-logic abuse, payment and workflow manipulation.
- APIs — REST and GraphQL: broken authorization, mass assignment, rate-limit and quota abuse, token handling, versioned endpoints everyone forgot.
- Network & infrastructure — external and internal perimeter, exposed services, lateral movement paths, misconfigured trust relationships.
- Mobile applications — Android and iOS: insecure storage, transport security, API trust assumptions, tampering and reversing resistance.
- Cloud configurations — IAM policy review, storage exposure, network segmentation, secrets handling across AWS, Azure and GCP.
What you receive
- Executive summary — business-language risk narrative your leadership and customers can read.
- Technical report — reproducible findings with working proofs of concept, triaged P1→P5 by real-world severity.
- Remediation guidance — developer-ready fixes, prioritised in the order that actually reduces risk.
- Retest & sign-off — we re-attack every closed finding and issue a letter you can hand to auditors and enterprise customers.
Before you ask.
Will testing disrupt our production systems?
No. Every engagement starts with written rules of engagement: what's in scope, what's off-limits, testing windows, and an emergency contact on both sides. Exploitation is controlled — we prove impact without destructive payloads, and anything risky is coordinated with your team first or reproduced in staging.
Black-box, grey-box or white-box — which should we choose?
Grey-box (test accounts plus architecture context) gives the best value for most teams: it spends your budget on finding flaws rather than on us rediscovering what you already know. Black-box simulates an external attacker with zero knowledge; white-box adds source code review for maximum depth. We'll recommend one during scoping.
How long does an engagement take?
It depends on scope — a focused web application test typically runs one to two weeks of testing plus reporting, larger multi-asset scopes run longer. You get the timeline in writing before we start, and the retest after your fixes is already included.
Can we use the report for compliance and enterprise customers?
Yes — that's exactly what it's written for. Findings are reproducible, the methodology is documented, and after the retest we issue a sign-off letter confirming what was tested and what was resolved, suitable for auditors, ISO 27001 evidence, and customer security questionnaires.
What happens after we fix the findings?
You tell us when you're ready and we re-attack every finding — same technique, fresh eyes. A finding is only closed when we fail to reopen it. If a fix didn't hold, that's a conversation, not a new invoice.
Your next security incident is cheapest right now.
A scoped conversation costs nothing. Tell us what you're protecting and we'll propose an approach — not a sales pitch.
Start an engagement →