An enterprise deal is waiting on a security review
A prospect has sent a security questionnaire, asked for a penetration test report, or made testing a condition of signature. You need defensible evidence, not a scan summary.
We test the product you actually ship — application, API, cloud configuration, and AI components — and hand your engineers reproducible findings they can fix, then verify.
Every engagement begins with written authorization and an agreed scope. Read our Authorized Testing Policy.
A prospect has sent a security questionnaire, asked for a penetration test report, or made testing a condition of signature. You need defensible evidence, not a scan summary.
New tenants, new integrations, new permissions, and a first AI feature have all shipped since anyone looked at the whole surface deliberately.
Not a list of theoretical weaknesses, but which paths are genuinely exploitable in your environment, what they expose, and what to fix first.
Each engagement is scoped to your product and environment. Pricing follows a scope review, because a fixed number set before anyone has seen the architecture is a guess.
Web, API, access control, and cloud configuration testing for a SaaS product.
Ongoing review of new features, fixes, and infrastructure changes.
Security testing for LLM features, agents, RAG pipelines, and tool access.
Application, API, cloud, and AI weaknesses are rarely independent. A permissive cloud role turns a minor API flaw into a tenant breach, and an AI feature with broad tool access can turn a prompt into a privileged action. We test them together.
Authentication, session handling, business logic, and the multi-tenant boundaries that separate one customer from another.
Authorization at the object and function level, token handling, rate controls, and the endpoints that never appear in the interface.
Identity and permission design, storage exposure, network reachability, and secret handling in the environment the product runs in.
Prompt and instruction handling, retrieval boundaries, tool and function access, and what an AI feature can be persuaded to do on a user’s behalf.
The same sequence every time, so you know what happens next and when your team is needed.
We review your assets, architecture, and objective to define what should be tested and why.
A written proposal states the scope, approach, deliverables, and commercial terms.
Authorization, in-scope and out-of-scope assets, dates, techniques, and emergency stop conditions are agreed in writing.
Manual, evidence-led testing within the approved scope, with communication throughout.
Findings with reproduction steps, evidence, business impact, and specific remediation guidance.
A working session with your engineers to walk through findings and answer questions.
Your team fixes issues; we stay available for clarification on any finding.
We verify the fixes and record the resulting status against each original finding.
We are a small, focused team. Rather than ask you to take claims on trust, we publish the things you can actually inspect before you commit.
See how a finding is written: reproduction steps, evidence, business impact, and remediation an engineer can act on. Clearly labelled as a fictional example.
What we test, how we test it, what we deliberately leave out, and how findings are rated. Written so your engineers can challenge it.
Nothing is tested without written authorization and an agreed scope, with defined exclusions and stop conditions.
Tell us what you are building and what is driving the timeline. We will come back with a written scope, an approach, and what it would cost — not a sales call.