Web Application Vulnerability Assessment and Penetration Testing

We test all types of web applications including single-page applications (SPA), progressive web apps (PWA), traditional server-rendered apps, REST/GraphQL APIs, and web services. Our testing covers applications built with any technology stack including React, Angular, Vue, Node.js, Python, Java, PHP, and more.

Vulnerability Assessment (VA) focuses on identifying and cataloging potential vulnerabilities through scanning and analysis. Penetration Testing (PT) goes further by attempting to exploit vulnerabilities to prove their real impact. Our VA+PT service combines both approaches for comprehensive security assessment.

Timeline depends on application complexity. A typical web application assessment takes 1-2 weeks. Complex applications with many features, roles, and integrations may take 3-4 weeks. We provide detailed scoping and timeline estimates during initial consultation.

We follow OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) with 91 test categories for comprehensive testing, OWASP ASVS with 286 controls for verification, and OWASP Top 10 for critical risk coverage. Our approach ensures systematic and thorough assessment aligned with global standards.

Our tests are carefully designed to minimize operational impact. We define clear scope and rules of engagement before testing. For sensitive systems, testing can be conducted in staging environments or during low-traffic hours. We immediately notify you if any critical vulnerabilities are discovered.

You receive: Executive Summary for management, Technical Report with vulnerability details and CVSS scores, Proof-of-Concept documentation, Remediation Guide with code samples, Risk Matrix prioritized by business impact, and Compliance Mapping to standards like PCI-DSS and ISO 27001. Plus a report walkthrough session and free retesting.

Black-Box testing simulates an external attacker with no prior knowledge. White-Box testing provides access to source code for deeper analysis. Gray-Box combines both approaches. Each has advantages - Black-Box shows real-world attack scenarios while White-Box provides comprehensive code-level coverage. We recommend the best approach based on your needs.

Cost depends on several factors: application complexity and size, number of user roles and access levels, need for source code review, compliance requirements, and reporting level. Contact our team for a free consultation and accurate quote tailored to your specific requirements.

Not for a standard assessment. Most engagements run as grey box: test accounts for each role and an outline of the architecture. Source code becomes useful when the goal is logic flaws or paths that cannot be reached from the outside, and in that case the assessment usually runs alongside a code review.

A WAF filters known attack patterns; it does not fix the weakness behind them. It also does nothing for the class of problems that look like ordinary traffic, such as one user reaching another user data or a flaw in a business flow. Part of the test therefore runs with our addresses allowed through the WAF, so what is measured is the application itself, and the rest checks how much the WAF actually stops.

A scanner is part of the work, not the whole of it. It covers known patterns quickly and it also reports findings that turn out not to be exploitable. Access control between two users, business logic, and chains where two small weaknesses combine into one serious finding are outside what a scanner can judge. Every reported finding here is verified by hand.

After any significant change to the application, and at least once a year. PCI DSS states the same rule for systems in its scope. In practice, teams that release often get more value from a smaller assessment tied to each major release than from one large test a year.

The fixes are retested. Each finding is either confirmed as closed or reopened with what still works, and you receive an updated report you can hand to an auditor or a customer.