Type to search across the blog, guides, tools, and services.
Fintech sits at the intersection of two things attackers love: money and immature, fast-moving code. A startup moving funds, holding balances, or touching payment rails is a target from day one, and the flaws that matter most are rarely generic. They are logic bugs in how money moves, which a standard scan will never find.
This engagement is built for that reality: a hands-on test of your money-movement and identity logic, plus the OWASP fundamentals, delivered with a report that satisfies the banking partners, auditors, and investors who will all ask whether you have been tested.
The flaws that hurt a fintech are business-logic flaws: a transfer that can be replayed, a race condition that lets a balance be spent twice, a rounding trick that skims fractions of a currency, a KYC step that can be skipped. None of these are in a scanner's signature database, because they are unique to how your product works. Finding them takes a human who thinks like an attacker with a financial motive.
Fintech also inherits heavy compliance and partnership pressure. Your banking-as-a-service provider, your card processor, and increasingly your investors during due diligence will ask for evidence of independent security testing before they will work with you or fund you. Getting tested early turns that from a blocker into a checkbox you have already ticked.
Startups move fast and accumulate risk quietly: a debug endpoint left enabled, an admin API without authorization, secrets in a repo. A penetration test catches these before they become the incident that ends customer trust in a company whose entire value proposition is trust with money.
Transfers, withdrawals, and balance updates tested for race conditions, replay, negative or manipulated amounts, and any path that lets value be created, double-spent, or moved without authorization.
Onboarding, verification, and limits, checking whether verification steps can be bypassed or a lower-trust account can act as a higher-trust one.
Every financial API endpoint tested for broken object-level and function-level authorization, plus rate limiting on sensitive actions like transfers and code entry.
Login, multi-factor, session handling, and reset flows, because seizing an account in a fintech means seizing money.
The report is written for engineers, partners, and investors alike. It contains:
Concurrent requests that let a balance be spent more than once because the check and the debit are not atomic, a classic and costly fintech flaw.
Amount, currency, or fee values trusted from the client, letting a user alter what they send, receive, or pay.
An endpoint that returns another user's account, transactions, or statements when an id is changed.
A verification or transaction-limit control enforced only in the UI, allowing a user to exceed the limits the business believes are in force.
No. Testing before launch is ideal, because fixing a money-movement flaw is far cheaper before real funds and customers are involved. We can test a staging environment so nothing touches production.
Your biggest risks are logic flaws unique to how your product moves money, such as replayable transfers or race conditions. Scanners match known signatures and have no concept of your business rules, so a human tester is required.
Yes. It states the methodology, rates findings clearly, highlights money-movement risks, and includes a retest, which is what partners and due-diligence teams look for.
Usually one to three weeks depending on the number of financial flows and integrations. We scope it precisely in a short call so the timeline fits your launch or funding schedule.
Book a free 30-minute scoping call. We agree the scope, timeline, and a fixed price up front — no obligation, and no surprises for your deadline.