Penetration TestingWeb and API Testing
We test web applications and APIs manually against the OWASP standards, including authorisation and business-logic flaws that automated tools miss, and give your developers fixes they can apply.
01Overview
Web application penetration testing is a manual security assessment of a website, web app or API that tries to exploit flaws in authentication, authorisation, input handling, session management and business logic, to show real risk to your data and users before an attacker finds it.
Web applications, single-page apps, portals, REST and GraphQL APIs, and the infrastructure that hosts them.
Grey box with test accounts is the most efficient. We also offer black-box and white-box tests with source access.
Before launch, after major releases, annually, and whenever customer data or payments are involved.
Reproducible steps, evidence, root cause and fix guidance for every finding.
02What we test
Mapped to the OWASP Top 10 and the way real applications fail.
We test login, registration, password reset, MFA and session handling for weaknesses that lead to account takeover.
What you receive
Evidence that accounts cannot be taken over.
The most common serious flaw: users reaching data or functions that belong to others.
What you receive
Proof that each role sees only what it should.
Where untrusted input reaches databases, operating systems, templates or parsers.
What you receive
Injection paths found and closed.
Flaws in how the application's rules can be bent, which no scanner understands.
What you receive
Fraud and abuse scenarios demonstrated.
REST and GraphQL APIs tested against the OWASP API Security Top 10.
What you receive
An API that exposes only what it should.
The server, framework and cloud settings around the application.
What you receive
A hardened deployment baseline.
03How we work
We learn how the application should behave before we try to break it.
Phase 1 · Days 1 to 2
Walk-through, roles, data flows and a threat model.
Phase 2 · Days 3 to 8
Manual and tool-assisted testing across every role and function.
Phase 3 · Days 9 to 10
Evidence, risk ratings and fix guidance, with developer sessions.
Phase 4 · On request
Confirm fixes and issue the final report.
04Reference
A quick map from risk category to our tests.
| OWASP risk | What we test | Typical impact |
|---|---|---|
| Broken access control | Role, object and tenant isolation, forced browsing | Data exposure, privilege escalation |
| Cryptographic failures | TLS, storage of secrets, sensitive data exposure | Credential and data theft |
| Injection | SQL, NoSQL, OS command, template and XSS | Data theft, remote code execution |
| Insecure design | Business-logic abuse and missing controls | Fraud, abuse, bypass |
| Security misconfiguration | Headers, defaults, verbose errors, cloud settings | Information leakage, takeover |
| Vulnerable components | Outdated libraries and frameworks | Known-exploit compromise |
| Identification and authentication failures | Login, MFA, reset and session handling | Account takeover |
| Server-side request forgery | Internal service and metadata access | Cloud credential theft |
05Standards
Recognised references your auditors and developers already know.
The reference methodology for web application testing.
How we help: Our test plan baseline.
A verification standard with levels for different risk.
How we help: Used to scope depth by level.
The most critical API risks.
How we help: Used for every API test.
A shared catalogue of software weaknesses.
How we help: Every finding carries a CWE.
06Saudi Arabia and the GCC
Web applications that hold citizen, patient or customer data face the strictest scrutiny.
The ECC includes web application security as its own control area, and expects regular testing of externally exposed applications.
Banking and fintech applications are tested against SAMA expectations and, where cards are involved, PCI DSS requirement 6 and 11.
Right-to-left interfaces, Arabic input handling and bilingual forms need testers who understand them.
Portals integrated with national services such as Nafath and Absher need extra care around identity flows.
07Why GoAgile
We write software too, so we speak your developers' language.
Our own engineers help developers understand and fix issues.
Manual testing finds what automated scanners cannot.
Findings reflect how each user type could attack.
Steps, evidence and fixes for every issue.
Right-to-left and bilingual applications handled properly.
Closure confirmed and recorded.
Credentials
08Clients
Organisations in regulated sectors choose GoAgile because security is delivered by the team that also builds and runs their infrastructure.
Tier-1 Saudi bank
Banking
National energy operator
Oil, gas and power
Government authority
Public sector
Regional telecom operator
Telecommunications
Healthcare group
Hospitals and clinics
Retail and e-commerce group
Retail
Ports and logistics operator
Logistics
Insurance company
Insurance
Fintech and payments provider
Financial technology
Industrial manufacturer
Manufacturing
Card data touched more systems than anyone realised, which made validation slow and expensive.
Result: A smaller scope and a smoother assessment.
A customer-facing platform was about to launch and needed independent assurance.
Result: Critical issues fixed before launch and developers trained on the patterns found.
The bank needed evidence that its people, processes and detection would hold up against a realistic attacker, in line with SAMA expectations.
Result: Detection gaps were fixed, playbooks were updated and the board received a plain-language report.
Client names are withheld for confidentiality.
09Related services
Each service stands alone and works better with the others.
Tell us what it does, who uses it and when it goes live. We will propose a scope and a fixed price.
Scope an application test10Questions answered
Tell us about your environment and what you need. We will respond with a scoped proposal, not a brochure.
Specialists who do this work every week, reporting in Arabic and English.