Secure code is the last line of defence. A secure architecture and hardened systems matter less if business logic, input handling, or dependency management contain flaws.
Our Code Review service combines automated static analysis with deep manual review to find logic errors, insecure patterns, and risky third-party components that automated tools alone miss. The goal is to produce actionable findings with proof-of-concepts, prioritized by business impact and exploitable risk.
Scope Definition
Architecture & Threat Mapping
Static Analysis (Automated)
Manual Review
Secrets & Configuration Audit
Dependency & Library Analysis
Error Handling & Logging
Remediation Guidance
Define target repositories, components, versions, languages, and access method (read-only repo access or archive). Agree objectives, rules of engagement, and delivery expectations.
Execute multiple static analysis tools and dependency checkers tuned to the project stack. Consolidate and filter results to highlight relevant findings.
Manually inspect high-risk components (authentication, authorization, input handling, deserialization, cryptography) and validate automated findings. Prioritize issues by exploitability and business impact.
Analyze CI/CD pipelines and package management for risky publishing steps, insecure build artifacts, or vulnerable transitive dependencies.
Produce a comprehensive report with executive summary, scope, methodology, prioritized findings with PoCs, business impact, risk ratings, and actionable remediation. Present findings in a restitution meeting with engineering teams.
Validate fixes and ensure remediation did not introduce regressions or new vulnerabilities.
Duration depends on project size and complexity:
Developers can introduce security mistakes despite best efforts. A code review finds root causes—unsafe input handling, weak crypto, or flawed role checks—so teams can fix issues precisely and prevent production incidents.
Read-only repository access is preferred. Alternatively, you may provide an exported archive of the codebase. We handle sensitive data carefully and follow agreed confidentiality controls.
They answer different questions and work best together. A code review finds issues in source (root cause and fix). A pentest validates exploits in a running environment (real-world impact). Combining both gives depth and confirmation.
