GDPR Penetration Testing

This is the core. Article 32(1) requires appropriate technical and organizational measures, and lists examples including pseudonymization and encryption, the ability to ensure ongoing confidentiality and integrity of processing systems, and the ability to restore access after an incident. Article 32(1)(d) is explicit about a process for regularly testing, assessing and evaluating the effectiveness of those measures. A penetration test is that process in action, and its report is the evidence you did it.

The regulation’s principles require personal data to be processed with appropriate security, including protection against unauthorized processing and accidental loss. A test that shows an attacker cannot read another customer’s records is direct evidence you uphold this principle.

Security is meant to be built in, not bolted on. Testing during development, or before a new feature ships, is how you show that data protection by design is a working practice rather than a policy statement.

A controller has 72 hours to notify the supervisory authority of a breach once aware of it, and may have to tell the individuals affected. A pentest is a controlled rehearsal for the real thing: it tells you whether an attacker reaching personal data would even be detected in time to start that clock.

We work with you to locate personal data: the databases, the object storage, the logs that quietly accumulate it, the third-party services it flows to. That map defines the targets and the rules of engagement before anything intrusive runs.

The work is mostly manual. Burp Suite drives web and API testing; we probe authentication, authorization and business logic by hand, and use targeted tooling for the network and database layers. When we find a way to reach personal data, we prove it with a safe, minimal demonstration rather than mass-extracting real records.

You get an executive summary and a technical report, each finding scored with CVSS, evidenced and paired with a prioritized fix. We retest after you remediate, at no extra charge, and confirm the exposure is closed.

The single most common cause of personal-data exposure we find. One authenticated user changes an identifier in a request and reads another person’s profile, invoice or medical record. Scanners miss it because the request looks perfectly valid; a human tester catches it every time.

SQL injection that dumps a user table, or a database and object store exposed to the internet with no authentication. These turn one request into a full dataset.

Missing multi-factor authentication, guessable resets, and session tokens that do not expire, all of which let an attacker take over an account and everything the account can see.

Personal data ending up in application logs, error messages or analytics tools it was never meant to reach. This is a data-minimization problem as much as a security one, and it widens what a breach exposes.

A concise summary of data-exposure risk for leadership, then a full technical report with every finding, its CVSS score, evidence and a concrete remediation step. Findings are cross-referenced to Article 32 so the compliance connection is explicit.

An attestation letter you can show customers running vendor due diligence, partners and, if it comes to it, a supervisory authority. A free retest produces the confirmation that your fixes hold, which is the record that closes an audit finding.

You decide why and how personal data is processed, so you carry the primary duty to secure it and to notify a breach. A test here focuses on the systems where you make those decisions: the customer-facing platform, the internal tools that touch personal data, and the data flows you send to processors.

You act on a controller’s instructions, and Article 28 requires you to give sufficient guarantees of appropriate security. In practice your customers now demand a recent pentest report before they sign. We test the platform you operate on their behalf and give you the attestation that shortens their due diligence.

Special-category data raises the bar

Health, biometric, financial or other sensitive data pushes the appropriate level of security higher, because the harm from exposure is greater. If you process special-category data, we scope a deeper test and say so plainly in the report.

A new product, a migration, or a new integration that moves personal data all change your exposure. Testing before release is the by-design practice Article 25 expects.

An annual test keeps your assurance current, and a test after any suspected incident tells you what an attacker could actually have reached, which feeds a defensible breach assessment.