Security testing & remediation.

Broadwing tests applications, APIs, cloud infrastructure, and delivery systems for exploitable weaknesses, then helps implement and verify the fixes.

Engage us for penetration testing, a security assessment, remediation, or a combined engagement. If you already have a report, we can prioritize its findings and work through fixes with your engineers.

A scanner can identify a vulnerable dependency or an unsafe configuration. Hands-on testing establishes how a weakness behaves in your environment: whether a user can cross an authorization boundary, whether an exposed service leads to sensitive data, or whether a compromised credential opens access to other systems.

We prioritize findings using severity, reachability, required privileges, affected data, existing controls, and business impact. An authorization flaw that exposes customer records may need attention before a higher-scored dependency vulnerability on an unreachable path.

Applications and APIs

Examine authentication, authorization, session handling, input processing, and application behavior. Test whether an authenticated user can access another user's records, invoke privileged operations, or exploit weaknesses in the way the application handles requests and data.

Remediation can involve changes to authorization checks, identity integrations, application logic, and the tests that protect those boundaries.

Cloud infrastructure and service identities

Review exposed services, permissions, service accounts, workload identities, and secrets. Trace how access granted to one workload affects the systems and data it can reach.

We help tighten permissions, rotate credentials, and replace static-key dependencies where appropriate. Changes account for production access, uptime, and release windows.

Dependencies and software delivery

Bring vulnerable packages, container images, and build artifacts into a repeatable remediation process. Examine how upstream fixes reach deployed workloads, where patching stalls, and whether pipelines reintroduce findings through stale images or unmanaged dependencies.

We build and improve CI/CD automation for updates, rebuilds, validation, and promotion so new fixes can reach deployed workloads after the initial backlog is cleared.

Hardening and control gaps

Translate audit findings and assessment results into changes to configurations, registries, identity, and operational workflows. Validate the affected behavior and document remaining risks, exceptions, and work that depends on third-party fixes.

Open-source tools can make checks repeatable in repositories and CI/CD pipelines. We select tools and rules for your environment, investigate the findings, and connect confirmed issues to remediation. Examples include:

Scans feed the assessment; hands-on testing checks authorization, business logic, and how findings combine into attack paths. We configure release checks around agreed severity and exception rules, with owners and review dates for findings that remain open.

1. Scope the assessment. Agree on target systems, test identities, permitted techniques, testing windows, and production constraints. Identify the business processes and data that need protection.
2. Test and prioritize. Combine relevant automated checks with hands-on investigation. Document reproducible findings, affected paths, practical impact, and remediation recommendations.
3. Work the backlog. Implement or support the fixes in your repositories and delivery systems. Coordinate changes that cross application, infrastructure, and identity teams.
4. Retest and hand over. Repeat the check or exploit attempt that identified the finding, and confirm that legitimate use still works. Test related paths affected by the change. Record the result, remaining exposure, and the checks or processes needed to maintain the fix.

We agree on deliverables for the assessment, remediation, and retesting work you commission:

• An assessment report with affected systems, reproduction steps, attack paths, and practical impact.
• A prioritized remediation backlog with owners, dependencies, and validation criteria.
• Implemented application, identity, infrastructure, or delivery-pipeline changes.
• Retest results showing what was tested, which findings are resolved, and which remain open or need further work.
• Automated checks, operating documentation, and remediation evidence your team can use in security and audit reviews.

Illustrative finding → fix → retest

An example of the work and evidence, not a client result.

• Finding: A secret scan flags a service-account key committed to a repository. Investigation establishes whether it is active, its permissions, and where it is used.
• Fix: Revoke the exposed key, update dependent workloads, and replace the static credential with workload identity where supported. Add a repository check for new secrets.
• Retest: Verify that the old key no longer authenticates, the workload still functions with its replacement identity, and an inert test fixture triggers the repository check.
• Evidence: Record the affected identity, change reference, revocation confirmation, and test results without including the secret value. Historical scan matches remain documented as revoked credentials.

Continuous patching at HPC scale

For a leading HPC manufacturer, Broadwing built hundreds of pipelines that rebuilt containers and packages with upstream security fixes nightly. High and critical CVEs fell from nearly 5,000 to fewer than 50; the remaining findings were awaiting upstream patches.

Read the HPC vulnerability-remediation case study →

Credential and authentication hardening in production

For a leading social media platform, Broadwing rotated service-account credentials, removed static-key dependencies from key authentication workflows, and migrated dozens of workloads to a managed registry. High and critical vulnerabilities dropped by more than 95% within two months, with no service disruption during the engagement.

Read the infrastructure-hardening case study →

Can you work from a penetration test someone else performed?

Yes. An existing report can be the starting point. We review the findings with your team, clarify the affected behavior, prioritize remediation, and agree on the validation needed to close the work.

How is penetration testing different from vulnerability scanning?

Scanning identifies known vulnerabilities and configuration issues across the chosen targets. Penetration testing investigates whether weaknesses can be exploited to reach data, gain privileges, or affect a service. Both can contribute to an assessment; the scope determines the balance.

Do you perform the assessment or implement the fixes?

Both are available. Broadwing can assess a defined environment, join an existing remediation effort, or scope the assessment and engineering work together. We agree on the testing, fixes, and retesting Broadwing will deliver and the access and change approvals your team provides.

Can the work happen around production constraints?

Testing and change plans account for uptime, access, release windows, and the potential impact of each activity. We agree on those conditions before the work starts. The hardening case study above describes an engagement completed without service disruption.

What happens when a finding cannot be closed immediately?

We record the remaining exposure, why the finding is open, its owner, and the next action. That may be a temporary control to reduce risk, an upstream patch dependency, or a fix assigned to another team. Retest records distinguish a verified fix from a finding that remains open under an exception.

Tell us which systems need testing or which findings need fixing. We will review the fit and arrange a scoping conversation.

Discuss a security assessment →

Select Security on the contact form and tell us whether you need testing, remediation, or both. If you already have findings, describe the affected systems and the help your team needs.

Related: AI & agent security · Continuous security & compliance · Security engineering