Penetration testing
Web applications and APIs, cloud and infrastructure, mobile clients, and internal networks including Active Directory. Manual testing against a scope fixed before the fee, with the retest in it.
Penetration testing against your web apps, cloud, mobile and internal network. You get the path an attacker would take, the one fix that closes it, and a retest that proves it closed.
Where we have experience
What we do
Most engagements start with a test. The other two exist because a report nobody can act on is an invoice with a list attached.
Web applications and APIs, cloud and infrastructure, mobile clients, and internal networks including Active Directory. Manual testing against a scope fixed before the fee, with the retest in it.
For the check that does not exist as a product. Detection written for your own log shape, an access review that runs itself, a scanner for the one thing your stack does differently.
Threat modelling before a build, the security questionnaire you have been sent, or a second opinion on an architecture. Priced by the piece of work rather than as a retainer.
How the engagement runs
The same shape whether it is one web app or the whole estate. What changes is the scope, and the scope is fixed before you get a number.
Targets, test windows, what is out of bounds, and who to call if something goes down. Agreed in writing before anything is touched.
Hands on the keyboard against the scope, with tooling where tooling genuinely helps. Anything critical reaches you the day we find it.
Findings ranked by what they reach, reproduction steps for each, a fix order, and an hour with your engineers to walk it.
We re-run the same tests against your fixes and record what closed. It is in the fee, because closing the findings is the point.
What we find
A scanner produces a list. What matters is which findings chain together into something that reaches your data, and which single fix breaks that chain.
Quote portal · path to customer data
4 steps
Chain breaks at step 2 of 4
A path of this shape, not a client’s system. The middle finding is the one worth paying for.
What you get
Written for two readers at once. The engineer who has to fix it needs the reproduction steps. The person deciding what gets fixed first needs to know what each finding actually reaches.
Findings report
Web app · API · cloud identity · 12 days
Closed
4/6
1 critical · 2 high · 2 medium · 1 low
A report of this shape, not a client’s. The retest column is why the fix order at the top is worth arguing about.
Typical shape
Short enough that the system has not changed by the time the report lands, and scoped tightly enough that we can start within a few weeks of the first call.
Targets and rules of engagement are agreed first, so the fee is against a real scope rather than a guess at one. Nothing outside it gets touched.
You are paying to have findings closed, not counted. We re-run the same tests against your fixes and record what actually closed.
How we test
Published methodology, so coverage is checkable against something other than our word. Tooling where tooling helps, and manual testing for everything it misses.
The limits
If any of these is a hard requirement for you, say so on the first call and we will tell you straight away whether we are the wrong firm for it.
If Ackho wrote the software, we will not test it and call the result independent. We will help you scope it for someone else, and we will fix what they find.
We test to OWASP and PTES methodology. We have not been audited against ISO 27001 or SOC 2 and we will not imply otherwise on a tender. If your procurement needs a certificate from the tester, we are not the right supplier.
A test has a start and an end. We are not a monitoring service and we hold no incident rota, so ask about capacity before you depend on us for one.
FAQ
One call. We tell you what we would build, what we would not, and what it costs, before either of us commits.