Vulnerability Assessment & Penetration Testing

Find exploitable weaknesses, understand their business impact and give engineering teams a clear path to remediation.

Security testing

Turn findings into actionable remediation

Combine agreed scope, attack-surface discovery, automated checks and manual analysis to produce findings that engineers can understand, reproduce and address.

A practical testing flow

Scope → Discover → Validate → Report → Retest

Keep authorization, evidence and remediation connected throughout the engagement.

Vulnerability assessment vs penetration testing

Both activities can complement each other, but they answer different questions.

Vulnerability assessment

Identify potential weaknesses across an agreed scope using scanning, configuration review and manual validation.

Penetration testing

Safely attempt to demonstrate whether selected weaknesses can be exploited within agreed rules of engagement.

What we can test

Testing scope is defined around the systems, interfaces and objectives that matter.

01

Web applications

Authentication, authorization, session handling, input validation and common application risks.

02

APIs

Endpoint exposure, authorization boundaries, authentication flows and input handling.

03

Infrastructure

Exposed services, configuration weaknesses, network controls and patch-related risks.

04

Configuration

Targeted reviews of security-relevant settings within the agreed scope.

Our testing approach

Six stages designed to produce useful evidence without unnecessary operational impact.

ScopeConfirm assets, environments, accounts, exclusions and rules of engagement.
DiscoverEnumerate attack surface and understand the application or infrastructure.
AssessCombine automated tooling with manual analysis and targeted validation.
ValidateSafely demonstrate material findings where permitted and document evidence.
ReportPrioritize findings by severity, exploitability and business context.

Typical deliverables

  • Rules of engagement and confirmed test scope
  • Executive summary for decision makers
  • Technical findings with evidence and risk ratings
  • Proof-of-concept details where appropriate
  • Remediation guidance for engineering teams
  • Retest report for agreed fixes

Common problems

  • Scanner-only testing: important business-logic or authorization issues remain untested.
  • Unclear scope: assets, environments or test accounts are not agreed before testing.
  • Severity without context: findings are ranked without realistic impact or affected-asset context.
  • No retest: remediation is marked complete without independent validation.

FAQs

How is VAPT different from vulnerability scanning?

Scanning primarily identifies potential weaknesses through automated checks. Penetration testing adds manual analysis and controlled exploitation to validate whether selected weaknesses can actually be abused.

Can you test production systems?

Testing production requires explicit authorization, careful rules of engagement and appropriate safeguards. The environment should be agreed before testing begins.

Do you retest fixes?

Yes, retesting can be included to validate agreed remediation and provide a clear closure status for findings.

Need to understand your attack surface?

Share the application, API or infrastructure scope and your testing objective.

Discuss a VAPT Engagement