Authentication and account lifecycle
Test login, signup, recovery, verification, MFA, sessions, remember-me behavior, password changes, federation, OAuth, and the transitions between anonymous and authenticated states.
AUTH · ACCESS CONTROL · BUSINESS LOGIC
Web Application Penetration Testing
Manual web application penetration testing for authentication, authorization, business logic, injection, server-side, and browser security flaws.
EXPERT-LED · MANUAL VALIDATION
Test the workflows scanners cannot understand
Modern web applications fail at the boundaries between users, roles, tenants, workflows, and backend services. This assessment combines OWASP-aligned coverage with manual attack-path testing to find exploitable issues hidden behind authentication and product-specific logic.
HOW THE TESTING FEELS IN PRACTICE
Web application penetration testing, done by hand
Automation gives coverage. The findings that matter come from someone chaining weak controls together, questioning assumptions, and checking what a motivated attacker could reach next.
- Manual attack-path testing, not a scanner export
- Evidence you can reproduce and hand to engineering
- One retest round after remediation
ASSESSMENT COVERAGE
What the test covers
Coverage is finalized during scoping, then tested with a mix of systematic checks and manual attack-path analysis.
Authorization and tenant isolation
Validate object, function, and field-level controls across users, roles, organizations, support workflows, administration features, exports, and background actions.
Business logic and abuse cases
Challenge sequence, state, quantity, pricing, approval, invitation, quota, replay, concurrency, and trust assumptions using the real workflows that carry business impact.
Injection and server-side behavior
Test SQL and NoSQL injection, command injection, template injection, SSRF, XXE, unsafe deserialization, path traversal, request smuggling signals, and backend parser differences.
Files, content, and browser security
Review uploads, downloads, previews, content types, stored and reflected XSS, CSRF, clickjacking, CORS, postMessage, CSP, redirects, caching, and sensitive client-side data.
Secrets, errors, and exposed components
Check debug behavior, verbose errors, source maps, hardcoded secrets, third-party scripts, administrative endpoints, stale content, dependency exposure, and unsafe defaults.
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT FIRST
Penetration testing methodology
Every phase is designed to produce defensible evidence without taking unnecessary operational risk.
Scope and rules of engagement
Agree targets, environments, identities, exclusions, test windows, data handling, escalation contacts, and stop conditions before testing starts.
Architecture and threat review
Map sensitive assets, trust boundaries, data flows, likely attackers, and high-impact misuse cases so the test reflects the product rather than a generic checklist.
Systematic coverage
Use repeatable tooling and standards-aligned checks to cover the agreed surface while recording assumptions, constraints, and evidence.
Manual attack-path testing
Challenge identity, authorization, workflows, configuration, integrations, and chained weaknesses that require human context and adversarial reasoning.
Safe impact validation
Use the minimum proof required to establish exploitability. Destructive actions, persistence, and unnecessary data access stay outside scope unless separately authorized.
Report, remediation, and retest
Deliver risk context, reproduction evidence, root-cause fixes, and a stakeholder walkthrough. One retest round verifies agreed remediation.
ACTIONABLE OUTPUTS
What you receive
The report is written for two audiences: stakeholders who need a clear risk decision and engineers who need enough detail to reproduce and fix the issue.
- Executive summary and risk themes
- Scope, assumptions, exclusions, and coverage record
- Prioritized findings with evidence and reproduction steps
- Business impact and severity rationale
- Root-cause remediation guidance
- Retest status and residual-risk notes
COMMON SCOPING QUESTIONS
Web application penetration testing FAQ
Do you test authenticated areas and multiple roles?
Yes. Representative accounts for user, manager, support, administrator, and tenant roles allow authorization and workflow testing that an unauthenticated scan cannot perform.
Can the test run against production?
Yes when approved. The rules of engagement define safe accounts, request rates, prohibited actions, monitoring contacts, and stop conditions. Risky tests can be moved to staging.
Is source code required?
No. Black-box and grey-box testing are both supported. Architecture notes and targeted source access can improve depth for complex controls, but they are not mandatory.
Does the assessment include the application API?
The APIs directly used by the tested web workflows can be included. A broad public or partner API estate should be scoped as a dedicated API penetration test.
CLEAR SCOPE · CONTROLLED TESTING · USEFUL REPORT
Request a Web application penetration testing scope
Share the target, environment, roles, and objective. The service field is already selected so you can send the right context quickly.
- Written scope and assumptions before testing
- Safe rules of engagement and escalation path
- Manual validation with reproducible evidence
- Remediation walkthrough and one retest round
TELL US ABOUT YOUR SCOPE
Request a security assessment
Share a few details about the target and your goals. We will reply with the right testing approach and a clear proposal.
Protected against automated submissions. Only submit systems you own or are authorized to test. Do not include passwords, API keys, or other secrets.