AWS Advanced Tier PartnerISO 9001:2015 CertifiedISO 27001:2022 Certified
Book Free Review →
Cloud Application Security Assessment

Test the software you actually wrote.

An application security assessment examines the code, APIs and apps you ship, rather than the cloud account they run in. We test cloud-hosted web applications, APIs and mobile apps, and review source code where you want the depth. Findings are OWASP-aligned, rated by severity, and written so your developers can reproduce them. HAZERCLOUD is an AWS Advanced Tier Services Partner and is ISO 27001:2022 certified.

Book a free 30 minute review →See the full VAPT service
Assessment scopeAPPLICATION LAYER

Four surfaces, tested together.

  • Web applications. Authentication, session handling, access control, injection.
  • APIs. REST and GraphQL: authorisation, rate limits, object-level access.
  • Mobile apps. Android and iOS binaries, storage, pinning, and the API behind them.
  • Source code. Secure code review where you want depth rather than breadth.
What We Assess

Four surfaces where application risk lives.

Cloud-based application security testing means testing the software in the environment it actually runs in, with the identity, storage and networking it actually uses. These are the four surfaces we cover, and they are usually tested together because the interesting findings sit between them.

01 · WEB

Web applications

Authentication and session management, access control between user roles and tenants, injection in all its forms, server-side request forgery, file upload handling, and business logic that can be driven somewhere it was not meant to go. Multi-tenant SaaS gets particular attention on tenant isolation, because that is where a single flaw exposes every customer at once.

OWASP Top 10AuthN / AuthZInjectionTenant isolation
02 · APIs

APIs and service endpoints

REST and GraphQL endpoints tested against the OWASP API Security Top 10: broken object-level authorisation, excessive data exposure in responses, missing rate limits, and mass assignment. APIs are where modern applications leak, because an endpoint that is safe for the UI is often not safe for a client that sends whatever it likes.

RESTGraphQLBOLARate limiting
03 · MOBILE

Mobile applications

Android and iOS penetration testing covering the binary and its behaviour: insecure local storage, hardcoded keys and endpoints, weak certificate validation and pinning, exported components, and what leaks into logs and backups. We test the client together with its backend, since most real mobile findings are in how the two talk to each other.

AndroidiOSMASVSCert pinning
04 · CODE

Secure source code review

Reading the code rather than probing the running system. Automated analysis to cover breadth, then manual review of the parts that matter: authentication, authorisation, cryptography, input handling and secrets management. Manual review is where the subtle logic flaws surface, because a scanner does not understand what your application is supposed to permit.

SASTManual reviewSecretsDependencies
Methodology

SAST and DAST, in plain English.

The two testing approaches find different classes of problem and miss different things. A serious assessment uses both, and this is what each one is actually doing.

Static testing (SAST)

Reading the code without running it

  • What it does. Analyses source for dangerous patterns: unsanitised input reaching a query, unsafe deserialisation, weak cryptography.
  • Strength. Points at the exact file and line, and finds issues in code paths nobody exercises during a test.
  • Weakness. Flags things that may not be reachable in practice, so raw output needs triage before anyone acts on it.
  • Also catches. Secrets committed to the repository and vulnerable dependencies.
Dynamic testing (DAST)

Attacking the running application

  • What it does. Probes the live application from the outside, the way an attacker would, with no view of the source.
  • Strength. Everything it finds is genuinely reachable, so there is no argument about exploitability.
  • Weakness. Blind to code paths it never reaches, and to logic that only triggers under conditions it did not create.
  • Also catches. Configuration and deployment issues that only exist in the running environment.
We run both, then reconcile them. Static analysis finds the flaw in code nobody exercised; dynamic testing proves which flaws an attacker can actually reach. Manual work sits on top of both, because business logic failures are invisible to tooling that does not know what your application is supposed to allow. Everything is mapped to OWASP so findings arrive in a vocabulary your developers already use.
How This Fits With VAPT

Two services, different layers.

These overlap enough to be confusing, so here is the plain relationship. Ask us on the call and we will point you at whichever one you actually need rather than both.

Breadth → whole estate

VAPT is the umbrella

Our VAPT engagement covers infrastructure, network and cloud environment alongside applications. It is the right starting point when you want a single test across everything you run, or when a customer or insurer has asked for a penetration test without specifying a layer.

VAPT and penetration testing
Depth → the application

This assessment goes deeper

Mobile application testing and secure source code review are included here and are not part of a standard infrastructure-focused VAPT scope. Choose this when a specific product needs real depth rather than coverage across the estate.

Scope an assessment
Environment → configuration

The cloud audit is a third thing

A cloud security audit reviews how your AWS account is configured: IAM, network exposure, encryption, logging. It does not read your code. A perfectly configured account can still host an application with an authentication flaw.

Cloud security audit
Findings → fixed for good

Then keep it from returning

Fixing a finding once is worth less than stopping the class of bug reaching production again. DevSecOps puts the checks in the pipeline: dependency scanning, secrets detection, and security gates that run on every change.

DevSecOps services
Deliverables

What lands on your desk.

Written for developers to act on, not for a compliance folder nobody opens.

REPORT

Findings with reproduction steps

Each issue rated by severity, mapped to its OWASP category, with the steps to reproduce it. Your developers confirm the problem themselves instead of taking our word for it, which removes the usual argument about whether a finding is real.

PLAN

Remediation in priority order

An ordered fix list separating what ships this sprint from what needs a design change. Where a finding is a symptom of a wider pattern, we say so, so you fix the cause rather than the instance.

RETEST

Verification after the fix

Once you have remediated, we retest to confirm the fixes hold and did not introduce something new. You also get a summary suitable for a customer or auditor that states scope and outcome without exposing exploit detail.

Common Questions

What buyers ask before an application assessment.

If your question is not here, ask it on the call. We would rather point you at the right service than sell you the wrong one.

How is this different from your VAPT service?+
VAPT is the umbrella engagement. It covers your infrastructure, network and cloud environment alongside your applications, and it is the right starting point when you want one test across everything you run. This page is the application layer specifically, and it goes deeper there: mobile application testing and secure source code review are included here and are not part of a standard infrastructure-focused VAPT scope. Teams often start with VAPT for breadth, then commission an application assessment when a specific product needs depth. If you are unsure which you need, we will tell you on the call rather than selling you both.
What is the difference between SAST and DAST, in plain English?+
SAST reads your source code without running it, looking for dangerous patterns: unsanitised input reaching a database query, secrets committed to the repository, unsafe deserialisation. It finds things early and can point at the exact line, but it flags issues that may not be reachable in practice. DAST attacks the running application from the outside, the way a real attacker would, so everything it finds is genuinely reachable, but it cannot see code paths that are not exercised. They cover each other's blind spots, which is why a serious assessment uses both rather than picking a side.
Do you test mobile applications?+
Yes, both Android and iOS. Mobile testing looks at the app binary and its behaviour, not just the API behind it: insecure local storage, hardcoded keys and endpoints, weak certificate validation and pinning, exported components, and what the app leaks in logs or backups. A large share of real mobile findings are in how the app talks to its backend, so we test the client and the API together rather than treating them as separate engagements.
Will you need access to our source code?+
Only if you want source code review in scope. Black-box testing works from the outside with no code access. Grey-box, where we get limited documentation and credentials, usually produces better coverage for the same effort because we are not spending the budget on discovery. Full source code review needs repository access under NDA. We are ISO 27001:2022 certified and handle client code under the same controls we are audited against; access is time-bound and revoked at the end of the engagement.
Will testing take down our production environment?+
We would rather test a staging environment that mirrors production, and we will ask for one first. Where production testing is unavoidable, it runs inside an agreed window with rate limiting, a named contact on both sides, and an abort signal that stops the test immediately. Destructive checks are excluded unless you explicitly ask for them in writing. Nothing starts without a signed scope and authorisation.
What do we get at the end?+
A findings report with each issue rated by severity and mapped to the OWASP category it belongs to, including reproduction steps so your developers can confirm the problem themselves rather than taking our word for it. Alongside it you get a remediation plan ordered by priority, and a retest of the fixes once you have made them. If you need something to hand a customer or an auditor, we provide a summary that states scope and outcome without exposing exploit detail.
How does this fit with a cloud security audit?+
They look at different layers and the findings rarely overlap. A cloud security audit examines how your AWS environment is configured: IAM, network exposure, encryption, logging. This assessment examines the software you wrote and the APIs and apps you ship. A perfectly configured AWS account can still host an application with an authentication flaw, and a well-written application can sit in an account with an over-permissive role. Most teams that care about this end up doing both, usually the environment audit first because it is cheaper and faster to act on.
Scope it properly first

30 minutes. We will tell you which test you need.

Application assessment, full VAPT, or a cloud security audit. They solve different problems and cost different amounts. Bring the application and we will tell you which one answers your actual question, including if the answer is that you do not need us yet.

Book a free 30 minute review →Cloud security audit

★ AWS Advanced Tier Services Partner · ISO 27001:2022 · ISO 9001:2015

30 min Free Consultation →