Loading...
CREST-aligned · Secure Coding expertsSource code review
Source code review
services Malaysia.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST), manual code auditing, and secure code review. Our consultants identify vulnerabilities at the code level, validating against OWASP, SANS, and delivering Bank Negara RMiT, PDPA, and ISO 27001-ready evidence.
CONSULTANT CERTIFICATIONS
CREST-alignedOSCPOSCEOSWECSSLPCEHCISSP
9
Core review scopes
RMiT
Evidence mapping
Manual
Code inspection
90-day
Free remediation retest
CHOOSE A SCOPE
What to review, how long it takes, what you get
If you are comparing providers, the difference is not the SAST scanner used. It is whether the team can prove exploitability and produce code-level evidence your auditor, board, and engineers can all use.
EXPAND WITHOUT STARTING OVER
Start with SOC 2. Every other framework gets easier.
One secure coding control maps to many frameworks. Review and evidence it once, and the same work counts toward the next standard your buyers or regulator ask for.
70%
Estimated readiness
71%
Estimated readiness
71%
Estimated readiness
63%
Estimated readiness
62%
Estimated readiness
62%
Estimated readiness
56%
Estimated readiness
56%
Estimated readiness
41%
Estimated readiness
41%
Estimated readiness
38%
Estimated readiness
Indicative overlap based on shared control coverage · confirmed against your codebase during scoping
NINE REVIEW SCOPES
Comprehensive source code review
From web applications to embedded firmware — manual-led secure code review across the whole codebase, not just the parts a SAST scanner flags.
01
Web applications
React, Angular, Node.js, Java, .NET codebases reviewed for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities.
OWASP Top 10 coverageBusiness logic reviewDependency analysis
Learn more02
Mobile applications
iOS (Swift) and Android (Kotlin) source code reviews for secure storage and IPC.
Secure data storageHardcoded secretsIPC mechanisms
Learn more03
APIs & Microservices
Deep dive into REST, GraphQL, and gRPC services for authorization and injection flaws.
Authorization logicInjection flawsData exposure
Learn more04
Cloud functions
Serverless architectures, AWS Lambda, Azure Functions security review.
IAM permissionsEvent triggersSecrets management
Learn more05
Smart Contracts
Web3, Solidity, and Rust contract reviews to prevent financial exploits.
Reentrancy attacksAccess controlsLogic flaws
Learn more06
Legacy systems
C/C++, PHP, and older frameworks reviewed for memory corruption and logic issues.
Memory safetyOutdated dependenciesLogic backdoors
Learn more07
CI/CD pipelines
Review of infrastructure as code (IaC), GitHub Actions, and deployment scripts.
IaC misconfigurationsPipeline injectionSecret exposure
Learn more08
Authentication flows
Focused review on OAuth, SAML, JWT, and SSO implementations.
JWT validationOAuth misconfigurationsSession management
Learn more09
Cryptography
Review of encryption algorithms, key generation, and random number usage.
Key managementAlgorithm strengthPadding oracles
Learn moreMETHODOLOGY
OWASP and SANS Secure Coding — every engagement, same discipline
Aligning to recognised standards means code-level findings translate into the control frameworks your auditors already use, providing irrefutable evidence of secure development practices.
01
Scoping and planning
Define languages, repositories, and objectives. Gather access and set up the review environment.
02
Static Analysis (SAST)
Automated scanning of the codebase using commercial and open-source tools to identify low-hanging fruit.
03
Manual Code Review
Deep-dive manual inspection of critical components like authentication, cryptography, and business logic.
04
Validation & Triage
Reviewing automated findings to remove false positives and validate real risk.
05
Exploit Scenario Mapping
Determining how a code-level vulnerability could be exploited in a running application.
06
Reporting
Deliver findings with risk ratings, line-number references, and secure coding remediation guidance.
DELIVERABLES
What lands at the end of the engagement
A structured pack, not a SAST scanner export. We walk your technical team through the findings on a debrief call so the code fixes are understood, not just documented.
Board-ready executive summary
What was reviewed, the overall security posture of the codebase, and commercial impact.
Technical report with CVSS-scored findings
Exact file paths and line numbers for every finding so engineers can locate issues instantly.
Code snippet evidence
Snippets showing the vulnerable code alongside the recommended secure implementation.
Prioritised remediation guide
Written for the engineering team and ordered by severity and exploitability.
Attestation letter
Suitable for customers, procurement and regulators.
Retest report
Free verification after fixes are committed, typically scheduled 30–60 days after the final report.
Why teams pick nCrypt
CREST-aligned, OSCP-certified
Engagements follow strict scoping and reporting discipline; consultants hold OSCP, OSCE, and CSSLP.
BNM RMiT evidence mapping
Financial-sector findings map into RMiT remediation and board-reporting workflows.
Reports engineers can act on
Clear risk ratings, line numbers, and secure code fixes, not just a SAST scanner export.
Retest included
Free verification testing after remediation, so fixes are proven rather than assumed.
ACCREDITATIONS & TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS
ALL REVIEW SCOPES
Source code review services by scope
Web application code review
React, Next.js, Node, Java, .NET
Mobile application code review
Swift, Kotlin, React Native, Flutter
API source code review
REST, GraphQL, gRPC, auth flows
Smart contract review
Solidity, Rust, Web3
Cloud & Serverless review
AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, IaC
Legacy system review
C/C++, PHP, legacy frameworks
CI/CD pipeline review
GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Jenkins
Cryptography review
Encryption, hashing, key management
Authentication review
OAuth, SAML, SSO integrations
CREST-aligned code review
Assurance format for regulated procurement
Targeted security code review
Focus on specific high-risk pull requests
