01
Authorization before access
We do not test without a named owner, a written scope, and rules of engagement. If it is not in scope, it is out.
Penetration testing services · Doha & Marseille
Find what is exposed. Leave with what to fix. ZeroFlare tests the systems you authorize, documents what we can prove, and reports it so engineers and leadership can act on the same facts.
Doha, Qatar · Marseille, France
Services
Start with one assessment or combine them. Every engagement begins from scope, not from a generic scan.
01
Authorized testing of the web applications your customers, staff, and partners rely on.
Learn more02
Authorized testing of the APIs your applications, partners, and automations call.
Learn more03
Authorized testing of exposed services, remote access, and the paths between networks you believe are separate.
Learn more04
A review of how your cloud accounts are actually configured, and which of those choices an attacker could use.
Learn more05
Authorized testing of iOS and Android applications and the services they talk to.
Learn more06
An authorized adversary exercise, including social engineering only when the targets and the pretext are agreed in writing.
Learn more07
A broader look at known weaknesses, and a clear mapping to the control framework you actually use.
Learn moreWhy ZeroFlare
01
We do not test without a named owner, a written scope, and rules of engagement. If it is not in scope, it is out.
02
Scanners cover ground. The issues that matter are usually access control, trust between systems, and paths an automated check will not reason about.
03
Engineers get reproduction detail and remediation guidance. Leaders get a clear picture of impact, priority, and what will remain after the fixes.
04
A finding is not closed because a ticket moved. We retest the fixes you ship and say plainly what still stands.
Engagement
You always know what is in scope, what we are doing, and what comes back. The full method is on the methodology page.
We agree the assets, the objectives, the window, and the rules. You know who to call if something unexpected appears.
We test inside that scope. Destructive checks and denial of service stay off unless you explicitly authorize them.
You receive a prioritized report: what we found, why it matters, how we confirmed it, and what to do next.
After you remediate, we verify the fixes and update the record. Open items stay open until they are actually closed.
Where the work shows up
We do not publish a client list. These are the situations the services are built for.
Customer-facing applications, the APIs behind them, and the accounts that administer both.
Networks, remote access, and the management paths that keep a service running.
Identity, exposure, and logging in the accounts you actually use, not a generic benchmark.
A validated list of weaknesses, mapped to a control set you name, before a customer or auditor asks.
How an engagement is bought
One system, one question, a written scope. The usual first engagement.
An application and the cloud or network it sits on, scoped together so the findings connect.
After you fix what a previous report named, we verify the fixes and update the record.
What comes back
Every engagement produces the same kinds of documents. The methodology page describes them. None of them is a certificate.
Questions
No. We need a named owner and written authorization. A request to test someone else's environment is not an engagement.
Not unless the rules of engagement allow it in writing, with the constraints next to the permission. The default is no.
No. A scan is coverage of known issues. A penetration test is an attempt to reach an objective inside the scope. We sell them as different services.
Once the scope is written, a focused assessment is often one to two weeks of testing plus reporting. A red team is longer. The service pages give the usual shape. The contract names the window.
No. If you want findings mapped to a framework, name it and we will map gaps. That mapping is not an audit opinion.