For SaaS teams shipping AI, MCP, and agents

Security testing for SaaS products that ship AI, MCP, and agents

Appsecco tests core product behavior, connected infrastructure, and AI/MCP/agent attack surfaces together, so the coverage matches the system you actually shipped.

Fixed quote, project window, report walkthrough, and one revalidation window included.

10+
Years in product security
150+
Organizations secured
5,000+
Security vulnerabilities discovered
700+
Security engagements

Trusted by product teams at

01 / 05

Find the failures that only appear in your product logic

Business logic
APIs
Authentication
Authorization
Tenant isolation

We follow real roles, objects, and state changes to find paths a generic endpoint scan cannot exercise.

02 / 05

See how far a compromised identity or workload can move

Cloud accounts
Kubernetes
IAM
Workload identity
Attack paths

We connect configuration weaknesses to reachable control planes and data, so the result reflects the infrastructure behind your SaaS.

03 / 05

Test the AI layer in the context of the application around it

Prompt injection
RAG and retrieval
Data boundaries
Model APIs
Product actions

We test how the model, application, identities, and customer data interact instead of treating the AI feature as an isolated chatbot.

04 / 05

Test what the server exposes and what every tool can reach

Tools and resources
AuthN and AuthZ
Transport security
Input handling
Connected systems

We follow protocol calls into their real downstream permissions so tool misuse and cross-boundary access are tested end to end.

05 / 05

Challenge what the agent can decide, call, remember, and change

Planning loops
Tool use
Memory
Approval gates
Multi-step escalation

We model the whole action chain, including where a low-risk instruction becomes a high-impact outcome across connected systems.

Not sure where to start? Show us the highest-impact action your system can take and we will map it to the right service.

Harshit Agarwal, CEO and Co-Founder of Appknox — What AI Agent Red Teaming changed for Appknox
It gave our engineering and security teams clear areas to strengthen and helped us build greater confidence in the security of our AI features before taking them to customers.
**Harshit Agarwal**
CEO & Co-Founder, Appknox
Engagement: AI Agent Red Teaming

Roles, tenants, and workflows fail in combinations

What ordinary testing covers

Routine VAPT often checks visible inputs, sessions, and known endpoints.

What it can miss

It can miss object-level authorization, tenant isolation, and state transitions that only break in your exact role model.

How Appsecco tests it

We turn your users, roles, objects, and business-critical flows into an attack plan, then test the boundaries between them.

Infrastructure risk appears when identity can move

What ordinary testing covers

An application test may stop at the product endpoint and never follow the cloud trust paths behind it.

What it can miss

Compromised workloads, overbroad roles, exposed storage, cluster boundaries, and chained escalation can remain outside scope.

How Appsecco tests it

We map identities, workloads, and control planes to test what an attacker can reach next, not just which setting looks weak.

The model creates new paths through the product

What ordinary testing covers

A completed app/API pentest may never exercise prompt-to-retrieval, model-to-data, or model-mediated product actions.

What it can miss

Crafted input can cross data boundaries, expose hidden context, or trigger application behavior through a route the original test never simulated.

How Appsecco tests it

We build hypotheses from your prompts, retrieval, identities, data, and application controls before testers validate the reachable impact.

A small tool schema can carry broad downstream authority

What ordinary testing covers

API testing may cover the transport without examining MCP discovery, tool semantics, resources, prompts, and inherited identity together.

What it can miss

A tool can expose sensitive data or perform unintended actions when authorization is enforced at the wrong boundary.

How Appsecco tests it

We test the protocol surface and then follow each tool into the real systems, permissions, and data it can reach.

Agents combine decisions, memory, tools, and action authority

What ordinary testing covers

Traditional testing rarely models an agent planning several steps, carrying context, choosing tools, and acting across systems.

What it can miss

A poisoned instruction, weak approval boundary, or inherited identity can turn several low-risk actions into one high-impact outcome.

How Appsecco tests it

We trace the full action chain and test where permissions, memory boundaries, and human approvals should stop it.

Step 01

Start with a product demonstration

Show us the product as a normal user experiences it. We ask about tenancy, cloud hosting, AI use, business-critical features, integrations, authentication, and authorization.

The test starts from how value and trust move through your product, not from a list of URLs.

Step 02

Turn that context into a precise scope

The proposal references the methodology relevant to your product. When testing has multiple phases, the Statement of Work defines each phase and its boundaries.

You know which surfaces will be tested and why they belong in the attack plan.

Step 03

Build the plan from Appsecco's security KB

Our estimator maps your product context to the right services and specific work items in Appsecco's internal security-testing knowledge base.

The plan draws from deep service-specific methodology while selecting only the tests relevant to your implementation.

Step 04

Let humans steer AI and repeatable tooling

Humans steer AI for work that can be automated and follow the relevant checklist for the rest. Testers investigate what is reachable, demonstrable, and worth fixing.

Automation adds breadth and speed without replacing tester judgment or turning unverified output into findings.

Step 05

Receive findings engineers can work from

Each finding identifies what failed, where it failed, how it was demonstrated, why it matters, how to reproduce it, and what objective checks prove the fix.

Engineering can understand, reproduce, prioritize, and fix the issue without searching the rest of the report.

Step 06

Verify the fixes and close the loop

One revalidation round is included. After fixes, we retest the findings and the affected paths, then provide an updated report, a separate revalidation document when needed, and sometimes a third-party VAPT certificate.

You get evidence of what was fixed and whether the change introduced a new weakness in the retested path.

01
Understand
What control failed, where it failed, and under which roles, tenants, versions, or conditions.
02
Reproduce
The prerequisites, exact procedure, evidence, expected result, and legitimate control cases.
03
Prioritize
Exposure, severity, realistic business impact, demonstrated scale, and the limits of the claim.
04
Fix
Root-cause remediation, temporary mitigation, likely ownership, and objective verification criteria.

Sample report

Inspect an actual redacted finding

Pages 19 and 20 of the public sample preserve the finding title, severity, mappings, reproduction structure, evidence, business impact, solution, and mitigation while redacting client data and exploit details.

Open the 48-page sample PDF

Sample deliverable. Not a customer record.

Included closure

Revalidation closes the evidence loop

One round is included. Closure may be recorded in an updated report, a separate revalidation document when needed, and sometimes a third-party VAPT certificate.

Starts from

$4,000

Fixed scope and quote before testing begins.

Scope your assessment

Every assessment includes

Engineering-ready report
Report walkthrough
Remediation guidance
One revalidation round

If fixes are still pending after the included round, a second revalidation is $1,000.

Fixed quote before testing. Project report and revalidation included.

Questions

How is this different from a standard pentest?

A conventional pentest exercises the app but may not follow what AI can reach, what tools can do, or where agents inherit authority. Appsecco starts with your product's roles, tenant boundaries, AI features, MCP servers, and agent behavior, then builds hypotheses around the ways your specific implementation can fail.

Can each security service be scoped independently?

Yes. Apps & APIs Security Testing, Cloud, Kubernetes & IAM Security Testing, AI Application Security Red Teaming, MCP Server Pentesting, and AI Agent Red Teaming can each be the first engagement. During discovery, we map your product's attack surface to the service or services that need to be in scope.

What does the assessment include?

A fixed-quote, T-shirt-sized engagement with an implementation-aware attack plan, human-validated findings, an engineering-ready report, a report walkthrough, remediation guidance, and one included revalidation round after you fix the findings.

Can I review the report format before starting?

Yes. A redacted sample report is available at /sample-report without a form. It shows scope, evidence, finding structure, remediation guidance, and supporting artifacts.

What happens after the assessment?

Teams that ship frequently add monthly scans focused on changed routes, roles, tools, and workflows since the last baseline.

Core product surfaces

AI-enabled product surfaces

Product security specialists, not checkbox pentesters.

Company

Learn

Compliance

Industries

Security testing for SaaS products that ship AI, MCP, and agents

Choose the test that matches what you are shipping

Find the failures that only appear in your product logic

See how far a compromised identity or workload can move

Test the AI layer in the context of the application around it

Test what the server exposes and what every tool can reach

Challenge what the agent can decide, call, remember, and change

The missing tests depend on what you built

Roles, tenants, and workflows fail in combinations

Infrastructure risk appears when identity can move

The model creates new paths through the product

A small tool schema can carry broad downstream authority

Agents combine decisions, memory, tools, and action authority

Your implementation shapes every test we run

Start with a product demonstration

Turn that context into a precise scope

Build the plan from Appsecco's security KB

Let humans steer AI and repeatable tooling

Receive findings engineers can work from

Verify the fixes and close the loop

A security finding should already be an engineering work item

Understand

Reproduce

Prioritize

Fix

Inspect an actual redacted finding

Revalidation closes the evidence loop

Start with the service your product needs now

Every assessment includes

Know what your product can expose before attackers do.

Questions