AI-augmented penetration testing, code review and compliance
We combine AI-augmented dynamic penetration testing with human validation and SonarQube static analysis. We assess authorized applications, APIs and infrastructure, confirm findings, and deliver executive and technical reports with remediation guidance and retesting.
A scanner gives you alerts; you need to know what is exploitable and how to fix it
An automated list cannot distinguish a false positive from a real attack path or explain the business impact. Our service combines attacker-style dynamic testing, source review, and human judgment to confirm evidence, prioritize risk, and turn each finding into actionable engineering work.
- 01Rules of engagement covering authorized assets, accounts, windows, limits, and stop conditions
- 02Attack-surface map for the included web app, API, mobile app, repository, and infrastructure
- 03AI-augmented dynamic pentesting for exploration, validation, and controlled proofs of concept
- 04Human review of every finding to reject false positives and contextualize impact
- 05SonarQube analysis of security, reliability, maintainability, hotspots, and code quality
- 06Executive report for leadership and technical report for engineering with evidence and remediation steps
- 07Remediation backlog prioritized by severity, effort, dependency, and business risk
- 08Retesting of agreed fixes with closure evidence or documented residual risk
Included
- Web and mobile applications, APIs, repositories, and infrastructure explicitly authorized in writing
- Black-box, grey-box, or source-assisted testing according to the agreed scope
- OWASP, CWE, and CVSS v4.0 classification with business context
- Executive report, technical report, readout session, and one retest cycle
- SonarQube review when the source code and language are compatible
Not included
- Third-party systems or assets not listed in the written authorization
- Social engineering, phishing, physical testing, or denial of service unless specifically agreed
- Destructive exploitation, unnecessary data extraction, or persistence
- Issuing SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certificates; certification belongs to accredited auditors
- A guarantee that no vulnerability exists after the assessment
A complete cycle, from finding to retest
Aggregated, anonymized results from a security assessment of a first-party SaaS product, conducted in an isolated environment with no contact with production. Exploit proofs, endpoints, credentials and sensitive technical evidence remain private.
- 28
- Confirmed findings
- 5
- Critical
- 3
- High
- 7
- Medium
- 10
- Low
- 3
- Informational
Findings by severity
- 5
- Critical 18%
- 3
- High 11%
- 7
- Medium 25%
- 10
- Low 36%
- 3
- Informational 11%
Findings by category
- 15
- Dependencies
- 7
- Access control and trust boundaries
- 6
- Secret management
Closure and follow-up
- 01
Confirmed
All 28 findings were reproduced and classified by severity and impact.
- 02
Remediation in progress
The responsible team is implementing prioritized corrections.
- 03
Retest planned
A new assessment will verify remediation and close the testing cycle.
- 01
Scope and authorization
We define assets, environments, accounts, exclusions, windows, and contacts. No active testing begins without written authorization.
- 02
Threat model
We inventory roles, data, integrations, and trust boundaries so effort follows paths with meaningful impact.
- 03
AI-augmented pentesting
Assisted workflows accelerate reconnaissance, exploration, and attacker-style dynamic validation. Automation expands coverage; it does not replace expert judgment.
- 04
Human validation and SonarQube
We review evidence, reject false positives, and connect runtime behavior with vulnerabilities, hotspots, bugs, and code smells in the source.
- 05
Reporting and remediation
We document impact, evidence, safe reproduction, classification, specific guidance, and a plan ordered by risk and effort.
- 06
Retest and closure
We repeat the original case and relevant variants. A finding closes only when the deployed patch is verified and the attack path no longer works.
- SonarQube ↗
Static analysis for security, reliability, maintainability, and security-hotspot review.
- OWASP ASVS 5.0 ↗
Verifiable security requirements for modern web applications and services.
- CVSS v4.0 ↗
An open framework for communicating vulnerability characteristics and technical severity.
- NIST SP 800-115 ↗
Guidance for planning, executing, and documenting technical security assessments.
Scope, timeline and team are closed during discovery (no cost, 30 minutes).
Ultra Speed Cloud hosting from $99/yr with free .com domain, SSL, CDN and human support.
Web applications, internal platforms and APIs built on scalable architecture, designed to last and to evolve.
Custom in-company workshops for technical and product teams in AI, secure development and cloud.
- Vulnerability research across six first-party SaaS productsHow we evaluate critical paths across APIs, web and mobile applications, and infrastructure that we build and operate.
- Security patch validation: from finding to closureA patch is not validated because the code compiled: it must remove the attack path, resist variants, and leave reproducible evidence.