01
Local storage
Tokens, caches, logs, databases, screenshots, backups, clipboard and key storage decisions.
ios and android pentestingMobile application pentesting,
Mobile application pentesting,
from the device to the backend.
Assess iOS and Android clients, local data, platform trust, network behavior and API authorization as one attack surface.
what this engagement answers
A mobile assessment should not stop at static analysis of the application package. Real risk crosses device storage, platform permissions, deep links, embedded browsers, network traffic and the backend API.
Testing combines application analysis with runtime observation and representative user accounts. The exact techniques depend on platform, distribution model, anti-tamper controls and whether source-assisted review is in scope.
Primary baseline: OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard and Testing Guide.
scope
What is reviewed.
Final scope is confirmed in writing before work starts. Testing is performed only on authorised assets and within agreed rules of engagement.
02
Network communication
Transport security, endpoint validation, sensitive payloads and assumptions about certificate pinning.
03
Authentication and session
Login, device binding, biometrics, recovery, token lifecycle and logout behavior.
04
Platform interaction
Permissions, deep links, URL schemes, intents, WebViews, IPC and exported components.
05
Resilience
Reverse engineering, debug settings, secrets in the package and the role of anti-tamper controls.
06
Backend authorization
Object, function and tenant controls on the APIs the mobile client calls.
evidence
What you receive.
01
Executive decision summaryExposure, plausible impact and the order in which leadership should fund remediation.
02
Reproducible technical findingsAffected component, evidence, preconditions, impact and safe reproduction guidance.
03
Remediation planSpecific fixes grouped by urgency, owner and dependency rather than a flat vulnerability list.
04
Closure evidenceA retest outcome that distinguishes fixed, partially fixed, accepted and still-open findings.
// how it works
A controlled, decision-ready process
The engagement turns technical observations into owned decisions. Critical issues are escalated through the agreed channel, not left waiting for the final report.
01
Authorise
Confirm assets, accounts, timing, exclusions, contacts and stop conditions.
02
Model
Map roles, trust boundaries, sensitive actions and likely attacker paths.
03
Test
Combine manual investigation with appropriate tooling and safe proof.
04
Prioritise
Rate findings using exploitability, exposure, data impact and business context.
05
Retest
Verify fixes and record the final status for stakeholders and assurance teams.
buyer questions
What teams usually ask.
Do you test both iOS and Android?
Yes. Because implementations differ, each platform is scoped separately even when features appear identical.
Is jailbreak or root resistance mandatory?
Not for every app. Resilience controls should match the threat model and should never replace server-side authorization.
What build is needed?
A release-equivalent build and test accounts are typical. Debug or instrumented builds can improve diagnosis when provided through a secure channel.
Methodology and primary references
These sources define the baseline. The exact checks are selected for the architecture, risk, data flows and engagement objective, not copied as a generic checklist.
- OWASP MASVS: mobile application security verification standard
- OWASP MASTG: mobile application security testing guide
Need one view across the app and its backend?
Share the platforms, distribution model, account roles and release window at a high level. Credentials are exchanged only after scope and secure handling are agreed.