Loading...
OWASP WSTG v4.2 web app testing, ASVS Level 1-3 verification, and NIST SP 800-115 network pen tests by CREST and OSCP-credentialed testers.

Penetration testing methodology matters as much as the testers' skill. We work from documented frameworks: OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) v4.2 for web applications (covers 11 control categories from information gathering through business logic and client-side testing), OWASP API Security Top 10 for API testing, OWASP ASVS Level 1-3 for verification depth, and NIST SP 800-115 for network and infrastructure testing. PCI DSS and SOC 2 audits ask which methodology you used; checking that box matters.
Engagement scope determines depth and duration. Black-box (no internal knowledge, ~simulates external attacker) takes longer and finds different findings than gray-box (some access and architecture knowledge, more typical and cost-effective). White-box (full source-code access, ASVS L3-style) is appropriate for high-stakes pre-launch reviews. We help you pick the right combination based on threat model, compliance driver (annual PCI 11.3 vs continuous SOC 2 evidence vs pre-launch sign-off), and budget.
Our testing team holds CREST CRT, OSCP, OSWE, and Burp Suite Certified Practitioner credentials. Findings are delivered in a structured report with CVSS v3.1 severity scoring, reproduction steps, evidence, and prioritized remediation guidance -- not a Nessus PDF dump. Re-test of remediated findings is included in the engagement so you can close the audit loop. Because our team's roots span both offensive testing and engineering ops, recommendations are pragmatic about implementation cost rather than hand-wavy.

Engineering rigor, audit-ready process, and operational depth across cloud, SaaS, and software delivery
OWASP WSTG v4.2 methodology with manual exploitation, not just automated scanner output. Tools include Burp Suite Pro, Nessus, Nuclei, sqlmap, and custom tooling for application-specific logic flaws.

CVSS v3.1-scored findings with reproduction steps, evidence screenshots, and remediation guidance scoped to your stack. Re-test of remediated findings included so you close the audit loop.

Reports satisfy PCI DSS Requirement 11.3 (annual external and internal pen test plus segmentation testing for in-scope networks), SOC 2 CC7.1, ISO 27001 Annex A.12, and HIPAA risk assessment requirements.

A methodical approach from scoping to remediation verification.
One week: define test scope (URLs, IP ranges, authenticated user accounts, exclusions), test type (black/gray/white box), methodology (WSTG, PTES, NIST), engagement window, and rules of engagement (DDoS off, prod vs staging). Output: signed SOW and ROE document.
Two to four weeks for typical SaaS: reconnaissance, vulnerability identification, manual exploitation (not just scanner output), business logic testing, and post-exploitation/lateral movement where authorized. Daily check-ins so critical findings get patched mid-engagement.
One to two weeks: structured report with CVSS v3.1 scoring, executive summary, technical findings with reproduction steps and evidence, and prioritized remediation guidance. Re-test of remediated findings included; remediated items get a closure stamp suitable for audit.
One week: define test scope (URLs, IP ranges, authenticated user accounts, exclusions), test type (black/gray/white box), methodology (WSTG, PTES, NIST), engagement window, and rules of engagement (DDoS off, prod vs staging). Output: signed SOW and ROE document.
Two to four weeks for typical SaaS: reconnaissance, vulnerability identification, manual exploitation (not just scanner output), business logic testing, and post-exploitation/lateral movement where authorized. Daily check-ins so critical findings get patched mid-engagement.
One to two weeks: structured report with CVSS v3.1 scoring, executive summary, technical findings with reproduction steps and evidence, and prioritized remediation guidance. Re-test of remediated findings included; remediated items get a closure stamp suitable for audit.
Why regular pen testing is critical.
| Feature | No Testing | Regular Testing |
|---|---|---|
| Methodology | Ad-hoc internal review or scanner-only | OWASP WSTG/ASVS, PTES, NIST 800-115 with manual exploitation |
| Compliance Evidence | Audit findings on Requirement 11.3, CC7.1 | Annual report with CVSS scoring satisfies PCI/SOC 2/ISO/HIPAA |

Traditional penetration testing was not designed for AI systems. LLM-powered applications, ML pipelines, and model APIs introduce entirely new attack surfaces — from prompt injection and jailbreaking to training data extraction and model theft. TrustEdge.ai, our AI services division, provides specialized AI red teaming services that evaluate your AI systems against the OWASP Top 10 for LLMs and emerging adversarial ML techniques, helping you deploy AI with confidence.
Explore AI Security ServicesCommon questions about penetration testing and AI red teaming.
Buyers of penetration testing & application security typically partner with us across these adjacent disciplines
SOC 2 Common Criteria CC4.1 and CC7.1 reference periodic security testing. A clean pen-test report with a tracked remediation plan is core audit evidence.
PCI DSS v4.0 mandates external and internal pen tests of the CDE. We scope the engagement to satisfy the requirement and inform CDE design improvements.
LLM-powered features need their own testing methodology — prompt injection, jailbreaks, data exfiltration. Traditional web app pen-test methodology does not cover them.
Get a free scoping call with our security engineers.