Mobile apps fail in ways web apps don't. Insecure on-device storage, weak certificate pinning, IPC abuse, deep-link hijacking, and backend APIs that trust the client. We test iOS and Android binaries the way a real attacker armed with frida and a rooted device would.
What is Mobile Application Penetration Testing?
Mobile application penetration testing is a hands-on assessment of a specific iOS or Android app, looking for vulnerabilities an attacker could exploit to access data, escalate privileges, or compromise the backend services the app depends on.
Mobile testing covers attack surfaces that don’t exist for web apps: the device itself (where the binary, the secrets, and the cached data live), the platform APIs (IPC, deep links, custom URL schemes), and the trust relationship between the mobile client and your backend.
Why mobile apps need testing the web tester won’t catch
A mobile app is a binary running on a device the user controls. That single fact changes the threat model:
- API keys and secrets baked into the binary: extractable with five minutes and a hex editor
- Sensitive data in insecure storage: auth tokens in shared preferences, PII in unencrypted SQLite databases, screenshots in app switcher cache
- Certificate pinning that isn’t really enforced: bypassable through frida or objection in seconds
- Backend APIs that trust the mobile client: assuming a manipulated request couldn’t possibly come from the official app
- Deep links and intent filters: letting other installed apps drive your app into states the UI doesn’t allow
- Side-loaded debug builds: production APIs accepting requests from developer builds with verbose logging and disabled checks
Web testing misses these by design. Mobile testing is its own discipline.
CyberBullet’s methodology
1. Scoping & Threat Modeling
We start with the app’s purpose, its users, the data it handles, and the backend services it talks to. The threat model drives test prioritization; a payments app gets different test depth than a marketing brochure app.
2. Static Analysis
We reverse-engineer the binary: decompiling, inspecting strings and resources, identifying frameworks and SDKs, mapping permission requests, and pulling out hardcoded secrets, debug flags, and disabled checks.
3. Dynamic Runtime Testing
On a rooted Android device and a jailbroken iOS device, we attach frida and objection, instrument the running app, hook authentication and crypto calls, dump in-memory secrets, and manipulate runtime behavior to find what the app does when it doesn’t think anyone is watching.
4. Secure Storage & Data-at-Rest
We inspect every storage location the app writes to: Keychain (iOS), Keystore (Android), shared preferences, SQLite databases, cache files, and external storage. Anything sensitive stored without encryption is a finding.
5. Network & Backend API Testing
Through intercepting proxies (with pinning bypassed), we test the backend APIs across every authenticated role and privilege boundary, the same depth as a standalone API pentest, but with mobile-specific attention to client-trust assumptions.
6. IPC, Deep Links & Platform Attack Surface
We exercise every intent filter (Android), URL scheme (iOS), and custom IPC mechanism the app exposes, looking for missing authorization checks, parameter injection, and ways to drive the app into states the UI doesn’t allow.
7. Reporting & Remediation
Every finding includes platform-specific reproducible steps, the underlying code or config change that fixes it, and a re-test recommendation once you’ve shipped the fix.
Frameworks we map findings to
- OWASP Mobile Top 10 and OWASP MASVS L1/L2 verification levels
- OWASP MSTG (Mobile Security Testing Guide) procedures
- NIST SP 800-163: Vetting the Security of Mobile Applications
- PCI DSS 4.0 for apps handling cardholder data
- HIPAA Security Rule §164.312 for health-data apps
Our methodology
Every engagement runs through the same six phases. Manual validation isn't a finishing step. It's the product.
Scope & Authorize
16%We define the engagement boundary precisely before testing starts: in-scope assets, out-of-bounds targets, testing windows, and emergency-stop procedures.
- Written authorization letters exchanged before any packet leaves our infrastructure
- Signal / Slack channel established for real-time findings during the engagement
- Explicit rules of engagement reviewed with legal, IT, and business stakeholders
Passive Reconnaissance
33%Before a single packet touches your infrastructure, we map your external footprint using public sources only: DNS, CT logs, code repos, internet-wide scan data.
- Typically discovers 15-30% more attack surface than the client originally provided
- Certificate transparency, BGP, and GitHub exposure reporting
- OSINT profile for social engineering vectors if in scope
Active Discovery
50%We enumerate live services across in-scope assets (ports, software versions, auth mechanisms, and protocol configurations) correlated against current vuln data.
- Hand-tuned scanning profiles, not the default Nessus run
- Protocol-level inspection for TLS, SSH, SMB, Kerberos, LDAP
- Service fingerprinting to ground truth before any exploitation
Manual Validation
66%Every potential issue is validated by hand before it makes the report. No CVE-dumping. No false positives. This is what separates the engagement from a scan.
- Manual exploitation attempts for any finding of High severity or above
- Business-logic testing on top of the technical layer
- Chained vulnerabilities analyzed as a single attack path
Exploitation & Impact
83%For confirmed vulnerabilities with attacker value, we attempt exploitation to prove impact, not just that a CVE applies but what it gets you.
- Proof-of-exploit captured for every confirmed critical finding
- Pivot paths mapped to the actual crown-jewel data
- Interim notification inside 24 hours for anything critical
Report & Remediate
100%Every finding is paired with severity rated on real exploitability, reproducible proof-of-exploit, and remediation guidance your team can ship this sprint.
- Executive summary and technical deep-dive in a single report
- Findings mapped to CIS, NIST CSF, and relevant compliance families
- Retest included. We confirm the fix before we close the finding
What you walk away with
Frameworks we map to
Findings ship mapped to the control families your regulators and auditors actually check. Governance clients use these crosswalks directly in their program documentation.
- OWASP MASVS
- OWASP Mobile Top 10
- NIST SP 800-163
Questions we get asked
Do you test iOS, Android, or both?
Both, in a single engagement when the same app ships on both platforms. We compare findings cross-platform. Issues fixed on one OS but still present on the other are common, and they're the ones that survive a partial release.
Do you need source code or just the installed app?
Either. Black-box (installed app only) most accurately simulates an attacker with a Play Store / App Store download. Grey-box (with documentation + access to the staging backend) is faster and finds deeper issues. We recommend grey-box for most mobile engagements.
Can you test apps with strict obfuscation or anti-tamper controls?
Yes. Defeating anti-tamper is part of the engagement, not a blocker. We've worked through DexGuard, root/jailbreak detection, frida-bypass, and SSL pinning libraries. The output documents which protections held, which broke, and how. Useful evidence for security-control investment decisions.
