Web Application Vulnerability Assessment

These two get sold as the same thing, and they are not. A vulnerability assessment is about coverage: find and rank as many real weaknesses as possible across the whole app, so you get a complete risk picture. A penetration test goes narrow and deep, chaining flaws to prove how far an attacker gets. If you have never had your application looked at, start with the assessment. It gives you the map. When you need to prove a specific attack path to an auditor or a board, that is when the deeper test earns its cost.

We test from the outside as an anonymous visitor, then with credentials for each user role you have. The interesting bugs almost always live behind the login. A low-privilege account that can read another tenant’s invoices, or step up to an admin function it was never meant to touch, is worth more to an attacker than anything on the public marketing pages.

We start with a short call to agree the target: which application, which environments, which roles, and anything fragile you want handled carefully. Then we map the attack surface. Every route, parameter, API endpoint, hidden field and forgotten staging path gets catalogued using Burp Suite as a proxy alongside manual crawling. You cannot assess what you have not seen, and applications almost always expose more than the sitemap admits.

This is the core of the engagement. We drive the application through its real workflows and probe each input for the vulnerability classes above. Where a scanner would stop at a suspicious response, an engineer confirms whether it is genuinely exploitable, what data it exposes, and what an attacker would do next. That distinction is the whole point of paying a human.

Tool-assisted, human-led

We use Burp Suite, ffuf, nmap and targeted scanners to widen coverage and catch the obvious things quickly. The judgement stays with the engineer. Tools generate leads; people decide what is real, and that is where the false-positive noise gets stripped out before it ever lands in your inbox.

Every confirmed issue gets a CVSS score and, more usefully, a plain-language impact statement. A CVSS 7.5 that requires an authenticated admin is a different problem from a 7.5 an anonymous user can trigger against your production database, and your remediation order should reflect that. We rank on real exploitability in your context, not on a number in isolation.

The most common high-severity finding we report. Insecure direct object references let a user swap an ID and read someone else’s records. Missing function-level checks let a normal account call an admin endpoint the UI never showed them. These are logic flaws, invisible to a scanner, and they map straight to OWASP Top 10 A01.

SQL injection is far from dead. We still find it in search filters, sort parameters and legacy reporting screens, often blind and time-based rather than the obvious error kind. We confirm it carefully, prove what data is reachable, and never dump a production table to make a point.

Stored XSS in a profile field or a support ticket can hand an attacker an admin session. We test reflected, stored and DOM-based variants with context-aware payloads, and we check whether your Content Security Policy would actually contain the damage.

Default credentials, directory listings, verbose stack traces that leak file paths, and libraries three years behind on patches. Individually dull, collectively they are how a lot of breaches start. We report the ones with a real path to impact and skip the version-string noise.

A page your leadership can read in five minutes: the overall risk posture, the handful of issues that need attention now, and what they mean for the business in language free of jargon.

For every finding, you get the affected component, a CVSS score, the impact in your context, step-by-step reproduction, the request and response evidence, and a specific, prioritized fix your developers can act on without guessing. No copy-paste boilerplate remediation.

An assessment is a snapshot. Software changes weekly, so the risk picture changes with it. We give you a prioritized remediation plan and, where you want it, guidance on folding assessment into your ongoing application vulnerability management so the next release does not quietly reopen what you just closed.

Testing maps to the OWASP Top 10 and, on request, to the Application Security Verification Standard at the level you need. That gives auditors a recognised structure and gives your team a checklist for the next build.

ISO 27001 A.12.6 expects you to manage technical vulnerabilities. PCI DSS 4.0 requirement 11 expects regular testing of in-scope applications. SOC 2, GDPR and DORA all lean on demonstrable, documented security testing. Tell us your framework and we align the report and attestation letter to it, so the assessment counts as evidence rather than a separate box to tick.

PHP, .NET, Java, Python and Node back ends, whether they render HTML server-side or serve a REST or GraphQL API. Legacy systems tend to hide the sharpest injection and access-control bugs, precisely because nobody has looked at that reporting screen since 2019.

React, Angular and Vue front ends talking to an API behind them. Here the front end is only a suggestion. We test the API directly, because client-side checks that hide a button do nothing to stop a crafted request, and broken object-level authorization on the API is where the real exposure sits.

Where one bug can leak data across every customer, tenant isolation is the first thing we attack. We create accounts in separate tenants and try hard to make one read or write the other’s data. When that works, it is almost always the most serious finding in the report.