Source Code
Review
Find Flaws Early. Ship Secure Code.
Our Source Code Review combines automated Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with expert manual analysis to identify security vulnerabilities, insecure coding practices, logic flaws, and compliance gaps before they reach production. We review code against OWASP Top 10, CWE Top 25, and secure coding standards—then validate, risk-rank, and guide remediation so teams can fix what matters.
SAST & Automated Code Analysis
We begin with automated Static Application Security Testing to scan the codebase for known vulnerability patterns, insecure APIs, and coding anti-patterns at scale. Findings are triaged and prepared for expert validation so teams focus on real risk—not noise.
-
Static Application Security Testing
Run SAST across the application codebase to surface known vulnerability patterns early.
-
Insecure API & Pattern Detection
Identify insecure APIs, dangerous functions, and recurring coding anti-patterns.
-
Language & Framework Coverage
Assess code across supported languages, frameworks, and build configurations.
-
Finding Triage & Deduplication
Triage and deduplicate scanner output to reduce noise before manual review.
-
False Positive Reduction
Filter low-value alerts so developers spend time on validated security issues.
-
Baseline Against Secure Standards
Align automated checks with OWASP, CWE, and secure coding baselines.
Manual Secure Coding Review
Our specialists manually review critical application paths against secure coding standards. Beyond scanner findings, we evaluate authentication, authorization, input validation, cryptography, error handling, and control flow for weaknesses traditional testing can miss.
-
Authentication & Session Logic
Review authentication and session handling for insecure implementation patterns.
-
Authorization & Access Controls
Evaluate authorization logic and privilege checks across sensitive code paths.
-
Input Validation & Sanitization
Assess input handling, output encoding, and sanitization against injection risks.
-
Cryptographic Implementations
Review crypto usage, key handling, and insecure algorithms or custom schemes.
-
Error Handling & Logging
Identify unsafe error handling and sensitive data leakage through logs or messages.
-
OWASP & CWE Alignment
Map findings to OWASP Top 10, CWE Top 25, and industry secure coding practices.
Dependencies & Supply Chain Review
Third-party libraries and frameworks often introduce risk outside your own code. We review dependencies, known vulnerabilities, outdated packages, and unsafe integration patterns that can undermine application security even when first-party code looks solid.
-
Third-Party Library Inventory
Inventory frameworks, packages, and modules used across the application stack.
-
Known Vulnerability Checks
Identify libraries with known CVEs or insecure default configurations.
-
Outdated & Unsupported Packages
Flag outdated, abandoned, or unsupported components that increase exposure.
-
Unsafe Integration Patterns
Review how third-party code is integrated and configured in your application.
-
Secrets & Hardcoded Credentials
Detect secrets, API keys, and credentials embedded in source or config files.
-
License & Risk Context
Highlight dependency risk context that affects remediation priority and planning.
Business Logic, Compliance & Remediation
We go beyond syntax-level flaws to evaluate business logic, workflow abuse potential, and compliance gaps. Every validated finding is risk-ranked with practical remediation guidance so development teams can fix vulnerabilities efficiently and raise overall software security.
-
Business Logic Flaws
Identify logic and workflow weaknesses that scanners and black-box tests often miss.
-
Sensitive Data Handling
Review how sensitive data is processed, stored, and protected in code paths.
-
Compliance Gap Analysis
Highlight coding and control gaps relevant to security and compliance expectations.
-
Validated & Risk-Ranked Findings
Validate issues and prioritize by exploitability, impact, and fix complexity.
-
Practical Remediation Guidance
Provide clear, developer-ready remediation steps for each confirmed finding.
-
Secure Coding Recommendations
Share patterns and practices that help teams prevent recurrence in future releases.
Engagement flow
Our process
Left-to-right DevSecOps pipeline — from GitHub repos and push/pull into the Ownzap review engine, through SAST tooling, then out to production.
Development cycle
DevSecOps cycle
Security woven through Dev and Ops — before production release.
SAST tooling
- Checkmarx
- SonarQube
- Fortify
- Bandit
Review → production
Manual review
Remediate
Production
Next step
Secure your source code
Talk with our team about a Source Code Review tailored to your languages, frameworks, and release pipeline—so flaws are found before production.
Contact us