Security testing is more than running scanners. We combine automated tools, manual validation, business-context analysis and controlled exploitation to find weaknesses that could genuinely impact your organization.
Five phases · 5–10 working days · fixed process, adaptive depth. Each phase ends with something you can hold us to.
A working session, not a questionnaire — map assets, agree rules of engagement, set emergency contacts and blast-radius limits.
Passive intel first — OSINT, certificate transparency, leaked credentials — then active mapping. Often reveals shadow assets.
Hybrid manual and automated discovery. An engineer triages every finding against your environment — false positives die here.
Validate every finding with a safe proof of concept. Where chains exist, we build them end to end.
Two reports — executive and engineering. After you fix, we retest every critical and high finding at no additional cost.
From understanding your environment to closing out remediation, every engagement follows the same four-phase approach.
We start by aligning with your business goals, application architecture, and technology stack, then map the full public and internal attack surface so testing stays focused on real, reachable targets.
Aligned with
Recognized standards behind every test
15 frameworks
OWASP standards
Testing methodology
Threats & risk
Scoring & hardening
You always know what we are doing, why, and what you will receive at the end of each phase.
Goals, targets, environments and rules of engagement agreed.
Output · Signed scope
Map domains, endpoints, technologies and entry points.
Output · Attack-surface map
Identify what matters most and how it could be attacked.
Output · Test plan
Broad coverage with industry tools to catch the known issues.
Output · Raw leads
Engineers work through the service checklist by hand.
Output · Candidate findings
Safe proof of concept for every finding, so false positives are weeded out before reporting.
Output · Validated findings
CVSS scoring, evidence, business impact and fixes. Walkthrough call.
Output · Report & debrief
We help you fix, then verify the fixes hold.
Output · Closure letter
We don't improvise. Each practice follows the methodology auditors and regulators already recognize — and every finding is rated with CVSS 3.1 and mapped to CWE.
Network VAPT
Web applications
Mobile
API
SOC / detection
AI / LLM
Industry-standard, licensed tooling. Automated tools give us breadth — experienced testers validate every result by hand.
◈ Recon & OSINT
Map the full external footprint — subdomains, live hosts, open ports and leaked data.
◈ Web & API
Intercept, fuzz and exploit injection, access-control and business-logic flaws.
◈ Mobile
Decompile, instrument at runtime, defeat pinning and inspect local storage.
◈ Exploit & Active Directory
Safely validate findings and chain them into lateral movement.
◈ Code & dependencies
White-box source review and dependency scanning to catch issues at their origin.
◈ AI / LLM & SOC
Adversarial LLM testing plus SIEM and detection tooling for continuous monitoring.
Representative examples from web, network, API, mobile and LLM testing — each with the steps we use to confirm it and the fix we recommend.
Script injected into a ticket subject runs in the support agent’s browser, allowing session theft of staff accounts.
How we find it
How to fix it
Encode output contextually in the agent dashboard.
Related serviceSMB signing was not required on file servers, allowing captured credentials to be relayed for administrative access.
How we find it
How to fix it
Require SMB signing on all servers and workstations.
Related serviceAny signed-in user could read another customer's orders — including names, addresses and phone numbers — by changing the order ID.
How we find it
How to fix it
Enforce ownership checks on every object lookup server-side.
Related serviceA payment-gateway key was embedded in the APK and recoverable with standard decompilation tools.
How we find it
How to fix it
Move gateway calls behind your backend.
Related serviceInstructions hidden in a product review made the assistant reveal other customers’ order details.
How we find it
How to fix it
Treat retrieved content as untrusted data, not instructions.
Related serviceBOLA
the most common critical API flaw
A typical finding: changing an account ID in an API call returns another customer’s statements. We confirm it safely, show the exact request, and retest after the fix.
Typical scope: web app + 30 APIs · ~10 days · grey-box
Local data
sensitive data left on the device
A typical finding: patient data cached unencrypted on the phone, plus a certificate-pinning bypass. Each issue comes with fix guidance and is re-verified after remediation.
Typical scope: Android + iOS app · ~8 days · SAST + DAST
Attack chain
several “low” findings combined
A typical scenario: individually minor misconfigurations chained toward Active Directory compromise, and a chatbot tested for prompt injection and data leakage.
Typical scope: external network + LLM chatbot · ~12 days
Illustrative scenarios based on common findings — not specific client engagements. We never publish client names or results without written permission.
A documented checklist keeps every assessment consistent — and tells you exactly what to expect at each stage.
Clear for leadership, detailed for engineers. Browse a full sample report with representative findings — the same structure you receive at the end of an engagement.
Identify vulnerabilities before attackers do. Work with CRIS InfoTech to assess, validate, prioritize and improve your security posture.