APP / APP-02
Source-code review and application security verification
Analyse application code and configuration to identify security defects and understand their causes. Automated tools help target review, but findings must be validated and linked to usage.
WHEN IT HELPS
A focused response
to a defined need.
Internally developed strategic application, code takeover, recurring issues despite penetration tests or sensitive functions requiring review before release.
SCOPE & OUTCOMES
What the engagement covers.
Scope
- Agreed repositories and versions
- authentication/authorisation
- data handling
- secrets
- errors
- cryptography
- static analysis
- targeted manual review
- remediation recommendations
Deliverables
- Contextual report
- affected files and areas
- non-destructive evidence
- priorities
- developer recommendations
- backlog
- technical debrief
- optional follow-up review
Acceptance evidence
Findings are validated; actually reviewed scope is explicit; recommendations are understandable to developers; false positives are separated; conclusions relate to the reviewed version.
DELIVERY
How the work is structured.
Approach
Understand architecture; select risks and requirements; integrate or verify controls; test; hand over to teams and plan regression checks.
Prerequisites & responsibilities
Customer: code, architecture, developers, test environment and pipeline access. Provider: expertise and checks; code remediation only when included.
Scope factors
Applications, languages, repositories, dependencies, roles, pipelines, volume and depth. Separate tooling licenses, remediation development and maintenance.
Questions to clarify
Which languages and code volumes? Are dependencies and environments reproducible? Which functions handle the most sensitive data or operations?
IMPORTANT BOUNDARIES
Review depends on supplied code and allocated effort. A SAST result is not automatically exploitable; absence of alerts does not prove security.
Controls apply to agreed versions and scope. No scanner, SBOM or framework alone guarantees the security of delivered software.
IN PRACTICE
Illustrative situations.
These examples describe possible engagements and target outcomes. They are not customer references or achieved results.
Scenario 01
An application invoices multiple customers. Project: review authorisation and document-access paths. Target outcome: isolation-flaw causes identified and targeted fixes proposed, with regression tests to add.
Scenario 02
An acquirer receives software without quality assurance. Project: targeted review of critical components and secrets. Target outcome: takeover risks become visible; the report identifies unreviewed areas instead of certifying the entire product.
Technology and reference context
Examples: language-appropriate SAST and secret-scanning tools; OWASP ASVS as a selectable requirements baseline.
The final technology set is agreed during scoping, based on interoperability, licensing, access rights and operating requirements.
CONNECTED SERVICES
Build the next step.
These services can complement the engagement. They are not automatically included.
START A CONVERSATION
Make the scope clear.
We will clarify the objective, dependencies and responsibilities of this service before proposing delivery.