Overview
Engagements cover retail and corporate internet banking, banking APIs and open banking interfaces, mobile banking applications, ATM and CDM estates, core and middleware interfaces, and the internal corporate network behind all of them.
The distinguishing feature of banking work is scope breadth, and the recommendation is always to keep it in one engagement. Splitting testing across vendors by asset type produces findings that stop neatly at each boundary, which is the one thing a real attacker will not do.
What drives testing in this sector
Buying triggers
- Regulatory mandate
- Central bank and regulator frameworks require periodic independent testing: the State Bank of Pakistan for its licensees, SAMA in Saudi Arabia, CBUAE in the UAE, QCB in Qatar.
- Scope breadth
- Digital channels, core interfaces, self-service terminals and the corporate network all carry risk, and their weakest point sets the level.
- Insider and lateral risk
- The realistic scenario is a compromised workstation, not an unauthenticated attacker at the perimeter.
Where the engagement concentrates
Internet and mobile banking
Authentication, device binding, transaction authorisation and signing, beneficiary management, and limits enforced server-side.
Banking APIs
Object-level authorisation across accounts and customers, open banking interfaces, and the partner integrations that hold broad access.
ATM and CDM estate
Terminal hardening, kiosk escape, network exposure, and the interfaces between terminal and host.
Internal network and Active Directory
Assumed-breach testing from a standard domain user through to domain administrator, plus segmentation validation between corporate and card environments.
Core and middleware interfaces
Message-level authorisation and integrity between channels and the core, where trust is often implicit.
Fraud logic
Transaction limits, cooling-off periods, out-of-band confirmation, and whether controls can be bypassed by changing the order of operations.
Track record
Delivered as a single consolidated engagement for a banking client: internet banking web applications, online banking API security, the Android banking application, ATM and CDM security, banking servers and network, and banking desktop applications, with one report covering the full attack path rather than six reports covering six silos.
200+ projects delivered for 80+ organisations. Internal engagement log
Questions
Can you deliver a consolidated VAPT across all our channels?
Yes, and it is the recommended shape. Splitting testing by asset type across vendors produces findings that stop at each boundary. A single engagement can show that a flaw in one channel reaches customer data held in another, which is what the risk committee needs to see.
Do you meet regulator requirements for independent testing?
Reports are written to the structure regulators and internal audit expect: defined scope, methodology, CVSS-rated findings, evidence, remediation status and retest attestation. The applicable framework is confirmed at scoping so mappings are included from the start.
How do you test ATM and self-service terminals?
Against a terminal in a lab or a controlled branch environment, never a live customer-facing unit. Testing covers kiosk escape, exposed ports and interfaces, terminal-to-host communication, hardening and physical exposure.
How much does a consolidated banking VAPT cost?
Cost follows the asset classes in scope: internet banking, APIs, mobile, ATM and CDM estate, internal network and desktop applications. Consolidating them into one engagement costs less than commissioning them separately and produces findings that per-asset testing does not.
Why consolidate rather than use separate vendors per asset?
Because attackers do not respect the boundaries those vendors stop at. Splitting testing by asset type produces findings that stop at each boundary, while the path between two assets belongs to neither scope. One team across all six classes carries knowledge from each surface into the next.
Do you test core banking systems?
Interfaces and integrations around the core, yes. The core itself is tested only where the vendor and your risk appetite permit it, agreed in writing first. Most of the reachable risk sits in the channels and integrations rather than in the core ledger.
How do you test ATM and CDM estates safely?
Against units in a lab or a controlled branch environment, never against a live customer-facing terminal. Coverage includes kiosk escape, exposed interfaces, terminal-to-host communication and hardening.
Can the report go to our regulator and internal audit?
Yes, and it is written for both. A technical report for your engineers, an auditor-facing summary with scope, methodology, dates and outcomes, and a signed retest attestation. Findings are mapped to whichever supervisory framework applies to you, agreed at scoping.