Skip to content

Your business results matter

Achieve them with minimized risk through our bespoke innovation capabilities

Your contact details
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Please enter your message
* required

We typically reply within 4 hours. Prefer email? [email protected]

Pharos Production delivers security engineering services - threat modeling, SAST, DAST, penetration testing and incident response - aligned to NIST CSF, OWASP ASVS and MITRE ATT&CK. The team embeds security across the development lifecycle, from architecture review and code scanning to remediation and monitoring.

Reviewed and updated
Last reviewed by Dmytro Nasyrov, Founder and CTO. Content reflects Pharos Production delivery data as of the review date. Editorial policy.

What is security testing?

Security testing is the practice of proving how software resists attack instead of assuming it does. It covers static analysis (SAST), dynamic analysis (DAST), manual penetration testing, threat modeling and smart contract audits, each aimed at a different point in the lifecycle from source code to a running production system. Every Pharos engagement defaults to a gray-box methodology: partial access to source, architecture diagrams and test credentials so findings reflect what an informed attacker or a malicious insider would actually find, not what a black-box scan misses. Each engagement closes with a graded findings report scored against the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS), reproduction steps and a fixed 30-day remediation window with one free retest pass included. This page is for engineering leads and founders who need an independent assessment before launch, before a raise or after an incident, not an ongoing security operations retainer - see Cybersecurity Services for continuous SDLC, monitoring and incident-response coverage.
Authoritative citations 6 sources
  1. Fortune Business Insights Penetration testing market sizing, segmentation by testing type, deployment and end-use industry fortunebusinessinsights.com 2024
  2. NIST SP 800-115 Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and Assessment defines review, target identification, vulnerability validation and penetration testing techniques csrc.nist.gov 2008
  3. OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) provides a comprehensive open methodology for testing web application and web service security owasp.org 2024
  4. OWASP Top 10 catalogues the most critical web application security risks, used as the baseline scope for most gray-box engagements owasp.org 2021
  5. FIRST.org Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) v4.0 specification defines the severity scoring standard used across our findings reports first.org 2023
  6. Immunefi Crypto losses reporting tracks smart contract exploit categories and dollar losses across DeFi, including reentrancy and access-control classes immunefi.com 2024
What we do not do:
  • Continuous SIEM, EDR or 24x7 monitoring - that is operational cybersecurity, not a testing engagement (see Cybersecurity Services)
  • Compliance certification issuance - our reports feed a SOC 2, ISO 27001 or PCI DSS audit, accredited bodies issue the certificate
  • Bug bounty program operation - we run structured, scoped assessments with a fixed timeline, not an open-ended public bounty
  • Testing where the client is unwilling to share any source access - a pure black-box engagement finds materially less in the same budget

Gray-box penetration testing vs automated scanning: which do you actually need?

Automated SAST/DAST scanning is fast, cheap and catches the mechanical issues - injection patterns, outdated dependencies, missing headers - at every commit. Gray-box manual testing is slower and costs more but is the only approach that reliably finds business-logic flaws, authentication bypass and multi-step exploit chains a scanner has no concept of. Per NIST SP 800-115, a mature testing program layers both: continuous automated scanning in CI plus periodic manual gray-box engagements at major releases.

Factor Gray-box manual test Automated SAST/DAST scan
Business-logic flaws Found - a human tester chains steps a scanner has no concept of Missed - scanners test patterns, not business workflows
Authentication/IDOR Found - testers use real role credentials to probe access boundaries Usually missed without valid session tokens configured
Known CVEs and patterns Covered but not the focus - manual time is spent on what scanners cannot find Comprehensive - this is exactly what scanners are built for
Cadence Periodic: kickoff, major releases, pre-launch, compliance milestones Continuous: every commit or pull request in CI
Cost $10,000-$35,000 per gray-box engagement $6,000-$20,000 one-time CI setup, low marginal cost after
Output CVSS-scored report with proof-of-concept and reproduction steps Findings list flagged at commit time, routed to the owning engineer
When to use which Pre-launch, post-major-release, compliance evidence, after an incident Every day, every commit, as the first line of defense

Security testing at Pharos Production at a glance

  • Methodology: Gray-box by default: partial source access, architecture diagrams and test credentials for every engagement
  • Smart contract audits: Slither, Mythril and Foundry fuzzing plus manual review; reentrancy and access-control classes are the most common findings
  • Tooling: Semgrep, CodeQL, Burp Suite Pro, OWASP ZAP, Slither, Mythril, Foundry, Echidna
  • Coverage: Web and API penetration tests, mobile app tests, smart contract audits, SAST/DAST CI baselines, threat modeling sessions
  • Pricing: Threat model session from $3,000; gray-box web/API test $10,000-$35,000; smart contract audit $7,500-$22,000; SAST/DAST CI baseline $6,000-$20,000
  • Timeline: Threat model 3-5 days; SAST/DAST baseline 1-2 weeks; gray-box pen test 2-4 weeks; smart contract audit 1-3 weeks
  • Remediation SLA: 30-day fix window from report delivery, one retest pass included at no extra cost
  • Severity scoring: Every finding scored against CVSS so engineering and leadership read the same risk language

Our Software Development Expertise

Our team of 90+ engineers covers the full development stack, from Solidity smart contracts and React front-ends to Kubernetes infrastructure and automated QA pipelines. Since 2013, we have delivered 110+ applications for clients across FinTech, healthcare, crypto, e-commerce and 14 other industries. Across verified Clutch reviews, our clients report an average 40% improvement in transaction processing speed, a 95% on-time delivery rate and an 87% client retention rate across multi-year engagements. Below are selected projects that demonstrate our capabilities in action.

  • Taxi Aggregator App - application interface, screen 1
    Taxi Aggregator App - application interface, screen 2
    Social

    Taxi Aggregator App

    Pharos Production collaborated with a taxi aggregator platform to develop a high-load ride-hailing application that connects passengers and drivers in real time. This platform consolidates various fleets and independent drivers into a single system, ensuring quick ride matching, live tracking and transparent pricing. Built on a cloud-native infrastructure, the solution offers low-latency interactions, reliable trip processing and scalability for operations at the city and regional levels.

  • Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 1
    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 2
    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 3
    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 4
    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 5
    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network - application interface, screen 6
    Social

    Sagas. Time-lapse Social Network

    Pharos Production has partnered with Sagas to create a location-aware social platform that enables users to capture, publish and explore geo-located timelapses over time. This system combines real-time data ingestion, large-scale media processing and map-centric discovery to transform physical locations into dynamic digital stories. Leveraging cloud-native infrastructure and event-driven architecture, Sagas allows users to document urban changes, natural evolution and personal moments tied to specific places. The result is a scalable social network where time and location are central to content discovery.

  • PumpTap crypto wallet multi-chain asset dashboard
    PumpTap Crypto Wallet - application interface, screen 2
    PumpTap Crypto Wallet - application interface, screen 3
    Web3 & Blockchain

    PumpTap Crypto Wallet

    Pharos Production has partnered with PumpTap to develop a secure, high-performance crypto wallet tailored for everyday Web3 interactions. PumpTap lets users store, send and manage digital assets across multiple blockchains through a simple, intuitive interface. Built on a scalable, event-driven architecture, the wallet delivers real-time transaction updates, robust security and seamless integration with decentralized applications.

  • Pulse. Social Network With Prizes - application interface, screen 1
    Pulse. Social Network With Prizes - application interface, screen 2
    Pulse Social Network - Community commerce platform by Pharos Production
    Social

    Pulse. Social Network With Prizes

    Pharos Production has partnered with Pulse to create a community-driven social network that connects users with local stores through challenges, engagement activities and real-world prizes. This platform transforms everyday local interactions into interactive experiences, enabling users to earn rewards from participating merchants. Built on a scalable, event-driven architecture, Pulse facilitates real-time interactions between users and businesses and supports rapid growth across cities and regions.

  • Pro Gambling. Sports Forecasting Platform - application interface, screen 1
    Pro Gambling. Sports Forecasting Platform - application interface, screen 2
    Casino & Sportsbook

    Pro Gambling. Sports Forecasting Platform

    Pharos Production partnered with Pro Gambling to build a high-load sports forecasting platform focused on data-driven predictions, real-time analytics and scalable delivery of betting insights. The platform aggregates large volumes of sports data, odds movements and historical statistics to generate forecasts that help users make informed betting decisions. Built on a cloud-native, event-driven architecture, Pro Gambling delivers fast updates, transparent analytics and consistent performance during peak sports events.

  • Pleenk. Secure Payments Platform - application interface, screen 1
    Pleenk. Secure Payments Platform - application interface, screen 2
    Pleenk. Secure Payments Platform - application interface, screen 3
    Banking

    Pleenk. Secure Payments Platform

    Pharos Production has partnered with Pleenk to build a secure, scalable payments platform for fast transactions, fraud prevention and seamless integration with digital products. The platform processes payment flows in real time while maintaining high levels of security, transparency and reliability for both businesses and end users. Built on cloud-native infrastructure and an event-driven architecture, Pleenk provides a strong foundation for modern digital payments.

  • NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform. - application interface, screen 1
    NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform. - application interface, screen 2
    NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform. - application interface, screen 3
    NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform. - application interface, screen 4
    NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform. - application interface, screen 5
    Casino & Sportsbook

    NoMoreBets. Rapid Bets Platform.

    Pharos Production partnered with NoMoreBets to develop a worldwide one-tap live betting platform focused on speed and scalability. The system handles real-time odds and instant bets effortlessly. The result is a smooth, engaging betting experience that increased player retention, reduced drop-offs during live matches and positioned NoMoreBets for global growth since 2022.

  • Nextcheck, the KYC Platform - application interface, screen 1
    Nextcheck, the KYC Platform - application interface, screen 2
    Nextcheck, the KYC Platform - application interface, screen 3
    Nextcheck, the KYC Platform - application interface, screen 4
    Banking

    Nextcheck, the KYC Platform

    Pharos Production partnered with Nextcheck to replace outdated, manual onboarding with a secure, automated KYC/AML platform. Built on AWS, Kubernetes, Istio, Elixir, RabbitMQ, PostgreSQL and NextJS, the platform provides real-time biometric and document verification, risk assessment and compliance reporting. Since 2019, Nextcheck has reduced onboarding time by 60%, cut manual labor by 70% and expanded to support thousands of checks at once. Today, it powers global banks, FinTechs and crypto firms with a cloud-native, regulation-ready, growth-oriented compliance platform.

About the founder and CTO

Dmytro Nasyrov

Dmytro Nasyrov

Founder and CTO Pharos Production

Ask the founder a question

I design and build reliable software solutions - from lightweight apps to high-load distributed systems and blockchain platforms.

PhD in Artificial Intelligence, MSc in Computer Science (with honors), MSc in Electronics & Precision Mechanics.

  • 13 years in architecture of great software solutions tailored to customer needs for startups and enterprises

  • 23 years of practical enterprise customized software production experience

  • Lecturer at the National Kyiv Polytechnic University

  • Doctor of Philosophy in Artificial Intelligence

  • Master’s degree in Computer Science, completed with excellence

  • Master’s degree in Electronics and precision mechanics engineering

Pharos Production - Describe your idea & get a quote in 48h! Get an estimate for the costs, timeline & the team layout needed for your project Get a project estimate.

Pharos Gray-Box Testing Protocol

The Pharos Gray-Box Testing Protocol is our four-step engagement cycle: Scope and Threat Model, Static and Dynamic Analysis, Manual Exploitation, and Remediation and Retest.

  1. 1

    Scope and Threat Model

    2-5 days

    maps assets, trust boundaries and attacker goals against the OWASP threat modeling process before a single test case is written, so effort concentrates on what actually matters to the business

    Artifacts:
    • asset inventory
    • attack surface diagram
    • test plan scoped to the <a href="https://owasp
  2. 2

    Static and Dynamic Analysis

    2-5 days

    runs SAST against the shared source (Semgrep, CodeQL) and DAST against a running instance (Burp Suite Pro, OWASP ZAP), plus Slither, Mythril and Foundry fuzzing for smart contracts, to clear the mechanical findings before human time is spent

    Artifacts:
    • tool findings baseline
    • false-positive triage
    • coverage map
  3. 3

    Manual Exploitation

    1-3 weeks

    is where a human tester chains logic flaws, business-logic abuse, authentication bypass and access-control gaps that no scanner catches, validated against the CVSS standard for severity

    Artifacts:
    • proof-of-concept exploits
    • CVSS-scored findings
    • exploit chains
  4. 4

    Remediation and Retest

    30 days

    hands engineers a fix-ready report with reproduction steps and compensating controls, then re-runs the exact test cases that failed

    Artifacts:
    • retest report
    • before/after CVSS deltas
    • closure sign-off

The protocol is named because gray-box access is what separates a report that finds real risk from a scan that finds what is already public.

“A test that never sees the source code is a test that misses the bug hiding behind an access-control check three functions deep. Gray-box is not a compromise, it is what an actual insider threat looks like.”

, Founder and CTO, Pharos Production
Pharos Verified Delivery 4-phase methodology with typical durations and deliverables
  1. Phase 01 / 04

    Paid Discovery

    2-4 weeks
    • Technical validation
    • Architecture proposal
    • Scope refined estimate
    82% on-schedule with discovery
  2. Phase 02 / 04

    Iterative Build

    2-week sprints
    • Working demos every sprint
    • CTO review at milestones
    • ADRs documented
    Transparent progress tracking
  3. Phase 03 / 04

    Production Readiness

    • Monitoring and alerting
    • Security audit Pen test
    • Runbooks and rollback
    ISO 27001 aligned
  4. Phase 04 / 04

    Support

    Ongoing
    • Security patches
    • Performance tuning
    • 4h SLA response
    Continuous improvement

Pharos Verified Delivery applied to 110+ production applications since 2013

Real client transformations

Anonymized before/after snapshots from production projects. Metrics measured against client-reported pre-engagement baselines.

Smart contract audit Q2 2025 · Staking protocol, EU
Before

Pre-audit staking contract allowed a user to re-enter the withdraw function before internal balances updated. Static analysis with Slither flagged the pattern; manual review confirmed a working exploit path.

After

Reentrancy fixed with a checks-effects-interactions rewrite and a permanent regression test. Contract re-audited clean and deployed with $6.4 million TVL across 10 months without incident.

Slither flagged the reentrant call pattern in under 4 minutes of automated analysis; the manual review pass then built a working proof-of-concept exploit to confirm severity before writing the finding, so the client engineering team could reproduce and verify the fix themselves.

Gray-box API penetration test Q4 2025 · Healthcare scheduling platform, US
Before

Patient-scheduling API had passed an internal code review with no findings. No external testing had been performed before a planned public launch.

After

Gray-box test found an IDOR chain exposing patient records across 3 endpoints plus 2 high-severity authorization gaps. All fixed inside the 30-day remediation window; retest confirmed closure.

The IDOR chain only surfaced because we had a test account with real role permissions - a black-box scan without credentials would have stopped at the login wall. Fixes shipped with a shared authorization middleware pattern the team now applies to every new endpoint.

SAST and DAST baseline Q1 2026 · B2B SaaS platform, Canada
Before

No automated security testing in CI. Each release relied on a developer manually remembering to check for common issues. Two prior incidents traced to dependencies with known CVEs.

After

Semgrep and CodeQL wired into every pull request, OWASP ZAP baseline scan on every staging deploy. Findings now caught before merge, zero dependency-CVE incidents in the 9 months since rollout.

Rules were scoped to the client codebase to cut noise from generic default rulesets, and findings route to the owning engineer through the existing pull-request review flow instead of a separate security dashboard nobody checks.

Client names anonymized under NDA. Full case studies at /cases/.

When security testing is not the right spend

We decline roughly 30% of RFPs we receive. Forcing a bad fit costs both sides 3-6 months and damages outcomes. Here is how we think about scope:

Projects we decline
  • Pre-MVP products with no live users and no external attack surface yet
  • Requests for a "clean report" for marketing without intent to fix findings
  • Budget that only covers a scan, not the engineer time to remediate what it finds
  • Ongoing monitoring or incident-response needs - that belongs with Cybersecurity Services, not a scoped test
We size the test to the asset, not the invoice

A $35,000 penetration test on a pre-revenue MVP is usually the wrong spend; a threat-model session for a few thousand dollars often catches the same architectural risk before code is written. We scope based on what is actually at stake - user data volume, transaction value, regulatory exposure - and recommend the depth that matches it, not the most expensive package we sell.

Read before you commit

State of Smart Contract Audits 2026 →

30+ Pharos smart contract audits benchmarked: cost by project type, finding severity distribution and time-to-remediation data.

How we count our stats
Testing metrics counted: engagements = scoped gray-box tests and audits with a delivered findings report. Smart contract audits = contracts reviewed with Slither, Mythril and Foundry fuzzing plus manual review, tracked separately from web/API tests. Remediation SLA = the 30-day window measured from report delivery to the client fix being available for retest. Last reviewed: . Corrections? Email [email protected] - see our Editorial policy for review cadence.
Important
Pharos Production performs security testing, not certification. Compliance certifications (SOC 2, <a href="https://www.iso.org/standard/27001" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">ISO 27001</a>, PCI DSS) are issued by accredited auditors who may use our findings as supporting evidence. A test result is a snapshot of the scope and time it covered, not a guarantee against future vulnerabilities.
Regulatory and risk considerations
  • A gray-box test covers the scope agreed at kickoff. New code shipped after the report is delivered, a new third-party dependency or a fresh CVE can introduce risk the report never saw. Retesting at each major release, not a single annual test, is the practical posture.
  • CVSS severity scores describe technical impact, not business impact. A medium-CVSS finding on a system holding regulated data can carry more real-world risk than a high-CVSS finding on an internal tool with no external exposure - we contextualize both in every report.
  • Smart contract audits reduce but do not eliminate exploit risk. Immunefi crypto-loss reporting shows exploited contracts that had passed a prior audit, usually because the exploited code path was added or changed after the audit scope closed.
  • Pharos security testing does not replace compliance attestation. SOC 2 reports are issued by AICPA-licensed CPA firms; PCI DSS reports of compliance are issued by PCI-SSC-registered QSA firms; ISO 27001 certificates are issued by accredited certification bodies. Our reports are evidence those auditors can use, not a substitute for their signoff.
  • A penetration test finding a low count of vulnerabilities is not proof of a secure system - it can also reflect a narrow scope, limited time budget or an engagement that excluded the riskiest components. Ask what was in scope, not just how many findings came back.

Reviews

Independent reviews from Clutch, GoodFirms and Google - verified client feedback on our software projects

Based on 9 verified client reviews

5 out of 5 stars
Software Development

Delivered blockchain platform with strong UI and trading features along with security audits.

Artur Patyk
5 out of 5 stars
AI

Stable platform delivery with minimal disruption.

Amber Caruso
5 out of 5 stars
Web3 & Blockchain

Delivered mobile blockchain solution with strong execution.

Juan Castellanos
5 out of 5 stars
Information Technology

Improved infrastructure reliability and deployment speed with strong communication.

Patrick Baynes, CEO
5 out of 5 stars
Information Technology

Enhanced system infrastructure with security-first approach and improved performance.

Roman Barbotkin
5 out of 5 stars
Web3 & Blockchain

Enhanced data security and transparency with real-time updates and smooth delivery.

Steve Maher
5 out of 5 stars
Web3 & Blockchain

Delivered secure code and exceeded expectations with strong responsiveness.

Anonymous
5 out of 5 stars
Web3 & Blockchain

Enabled secure coordination across decentralized energy systems.

Jeanine Sheptone
5 out of 5 stars
Web3 & Blockchain

Delivered secure healthcare-oriented blockchain integration with strong compliance.

Johan Jardevall

Platforms we work with

Trusted by Coinbase, Consensys, Core Scientific, MicroStrategy, Gate.io and 10+ more Web3 and enterprise platforms

16+ partners

Our 16 technology partners include:

  • Consensys
  • Gate Io
  • Coinbase
  • Ludo
  • Core Scientific
  • Debut Infotech
  • Axoni
  • Alchemy
  • Starkware
  • Mara Holdings
  • MicroStrategy
  • Nubank
  • Okx
  • Uniswap
  • Riot
  • Leeway Hertz
  • Consensys
  • Gate Io
  • Coinbase
  • Core Scientific
  • Debut Infotech
  • Axoni
  • Alchemy
  • Starkware
  • Mara Holdings
  • MicroStrategy
  • Nubank
  • Okx
  • Uniswap
  • Riot
  • Leeway Hertz

Pharos Production - Ready to realize your vision? Embrace outsourcing and remote hiring with our skilled software developers! Build Your Software Today.

Dmytro Nasyrov - Founder and CTO of Pharos Production

Reviewed by Dmytro Nasyrov

Founder and CTO

23+ years in custom software development. Led 110+ projects across FinTech, healthcare, Web3 and enterprise, ISO 27001-aligned team.

Choose your cooperation model

Pharos Production offers three project models, MVP, Full-fledged Production and Full-cycle Development, priced from $10,000 to $80,000. An MVP prototype takes about 3 months.

Suitable for the project test
MVP

Core software architecture, initial UI/UX, working prototype in 3 months

$11,000 - $28,000
Popular choice
Suitable in 9 out of 10 cases
Full-fledged Production

Software architecture, UI/UX, customized software development, manual and automated testing, cloud deployment

$24,000 - $50,000
Turnkey development
Full-cycle Development

Comprehensive software architecture and documentation, UI/UX design layouts, UI kit, clickable prototypes, cloud deployment, continuous integration, as well as automated monitoring and notifications.

$50,000 - $80,000

Prices vary based on project scope, complexity, timeline and requirements. Hourly rates range from $35 to $75 depending on role and seniority. Contact us for a personalized estimate.

Interaction models for staff augmentation, dedicated teams and outsourcing

Request staff augmentation

Need extra hands on your software project? Our developers can jump in at any stage - from architecture to auditing - and integrate seamlessly with your team to fill any technical gaps.

Outsource your project

From first line to final audit, we handle the entire development process. We will deliver secure, production-ready software, while you can focus on your business.

Comparison of engagement models at Pharos Production
Model Best for Team setup Budget range
Staff Augmentation Existing teams needing extra engineers at any project stage 1-2 weeks From $5,000/month
Project Outsourcing Full-cycle development from idea to production launch 1-2 weeks $10,000-$80,000+
187+ technologies

Technologies, tools and frameworks we use

Our engineers work with 187+ technologies across blockchain, backend, frontend, mobile and DevOps - chosen for production reliability and performance.

Our engineers work with 187+ technologies across 10 categories: Frameworks, AI, Blockchains, DevOps, Clouds, Databases, Brokers, Tests, Programming, UI/UX.

  • Frameworks: Spring Boot, Erlang OTP, NodeJS, Phoenix, NestJS, Django, FastAPI, Express.js, React, Next.JS, Svelte, Angular, Vue.js, Remix, Astro, Nuxt.js, iOS, Android, Flutter, React Native, Capacitors, Ionic, Swift, Kotlin, Java, Dart
  • AI: OpenAI GPT, Anthropic Claude, Google Gemini, Meta Llama, Mistral AI, Cohere, Ollama, xAI Grok, LangChain, LangGraph, CrewAI, AutoGen, Hugging Face, PyTorch, TensorFlow, scikit-learn, LlamaIndex, Keras, XGBoost, LightGBM, OpenCV, spaCy, ONNX Runtime, Pinecone, Weaviate, Qdrant, Chroma, pgvector, Milvus, FAISS, MLflow, Weights & Biases, DVC, Kubeflow, AWS SageMaker, Azure ML, Google Vertex AI, NVIDIA Triton, Airflow, Ray Serve, vLLM, OpenAI Agents SDK, Claude MCP, Semantic Kernel, Haystack
  • Blockchains: Ethereum, TON, Corda, Tron, Hedera, Stellar, Consensys GoQuorum, Solana, Arbitrum, Binance Smart Chain (BSC), Sei, Celo, Hyperledger, MultiversX, IOTA, Polkadot, Aptos, Neo, Flow, Algorand, Avalanche, EOS, Optimism, Polygon, Cosmos, Sui, Tezos, Ontology, Fantom, NEAR Protocol, VeChain, Base, IPFS, Amazon Managed Blockchain, Amazon QLDB, IBM Blockchain, Oracle Blockchain
  • DevOps: Kubernetes, Terraform, Docker, Istio, Prometheus, Grafana, Jenkins, ArgoCD, Ansible, GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Pulumi, Datadog, New Relic, Vault
  • Clouds: Amazon Web Services, Azure, Google Cloud, Cloudflare, Vercel, DigitalOcean
  • Databases: PostgreSQL, MySQL MariaDB, Redis, Cassandra, Neo4J, MongoDB, Elasticsearch, Solr, Ignite, ClickHouse, TimescaleDB, DynamoDB, Supabase, CockroachDB, ScyllaDB
  • Brokers: Kafka, RabbitMQ, Flink, Apache Pulsar, Amazon SQS, Amazon SNS, NATS
  • Tests: Postman, Appium, Cucumber, Selenium, JMeter, Cypress
  • Programming: Solidity, FunC, Rust, GoLang, Elixir, Erlang, C++, Java, JavaScript, TypeScript, Scala, Python, C#, .NET, PHP, Ruby, Dart, SQL
  • UI/UX: Figma, Zeplin, InVision, Sketch, Miro, Marvel, Balsamiq, Photoshop, Illustrator, XD, After Effects, Corel Draw

Frameworks

Backend Frameworks 8

Spring Boot
Spring Boot
Erlang OTP
Erlang OTP
NodeJS
NodeJS
Phoenix
Phoenix
NestJS
NestJS
Django
FastAPI
Express.js

Front End Frameworks 8

React
React
Next.JS
Next.JS
Svelte
Svelte
Angular
Angular
Vue.js
Remix
Astro
Nuxt.js

Pharos Production - 110+ applications delivered over 13 years. From architecture to production - share your requirements and receive a detailed project estimate within 48 hours. Get a project estimate.

An approach to the development cycle

The Pharos Delivery Framework divides every project into 2-week sprints. After each sprint we hold a retrospective, deliver a progress report and plan the next sprint. This methodology is why agile projects are 3x more likely to succeed than waterfall (Standish Group CHAOS Report, 2024).
  1. Team Assembly

    Our company starts and assembles an entire project specialists with the perfect blend of skills and experience to start the work.

  2. MVP

    We’ll design, build and launch your MVP, ensuring it meets the core requirements of your software solution.

  3. Production

    We’ll create a complete software solution that is custom-made to meet your exact specifications.

  4. Ongoing

    Continuous Support

    Our company will be right there with you, keeping your software solution running smoothly, fixing issues and rolling out updates.

Skip glossary

Security Services Glossary 7

Attack Surface
The total set of entry points an attacker can use to interact with a system, including web endpoints, APIs, mobile app interfaces, cloud storage buckets and on-chain contract function selectors.
CVSS Score
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System numeric rating (0-10) that quantifies the severity of a security finding based on exploitability, impact and scope factors, used to prioritize remediation effort.
Reentrancy
A smart contract vulnerability where an external contract call is made before internal state is updated, allowing the callee to recursively re-enter the calling function and drain funds before the balance is decremented.
Slither
A Solidity static analysis framework that detects vulnerability patterns in smart contracts including reentrancy, uninitialized storage pointers and dangerous delegatecall usage without executing the bytecode.
Threat Modeling
A structured exercise that identifies assets, trust boundaries, data flows and likely attacker goals to produce a prioritized list of security controls before implementation begins, using frameworks such as STRIDE or PASTA.
Gray-Box Testing
A penetration testing approach where the tester has partial knowledge of the target system - typically valid credentials and API documentation but not source code - simulating an authenticated insider threat or compromised account.
SAST (Static Application Security Testing)
Automated analysis of source code or compiled bytecode for security defects without running the program, used during CI pipeline scans to catch vulnerabilities such as SQL injection sinks and hardcoded credentials early in development.

Frequently asked questions about security engineering

Last updated:

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    Gray-box testing gives the tester partial knowledge - architecture diagrams, a low-privilege test account, sometimes source access - instead of starting from zero (black-box) or full source and credentials (white-box). It mirrors what a real attacker with some reconnaissance, or a malicious insider, would actually have, so findings reflect realistic risk rather than what a blind scan happens to stumble on. We default to it because in our experience it finds materially more high-severity issues per dollar than pure black-box testing.

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    SAST (static analysis) scans source code without running it, catching issues like injection patterns, hardcoded secrets and insecure dependencies early, directly in the pull request. DAST (dynamic analysis) tests a running application from the outside, the way an attacker would, catching runtime issues like misconfigurations and authentication flaws that static analysis cannot see. We run both: Semgrep and CodeQL for SAST, Burp Suite Pro and OWASP ZAP for DAST.

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    From the day we deliver the findings report, the client team has 30 days to fix what they choose to fix, then one retest pass is included at no extra cost to confirm closure. We do not charge separately for verifying the fixes we found in the first place.

    Findings the client accepts as risk (rather than fixing) are documented as such in the closure summary, not silently dropped.

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) is an industry-standard 0-10 severity scale maintained by FIRST.org that scores exploitability and impact so engineering and leadership are reading the same risk language instead of a subjective “bad/really bad” label. Every finding in a Pharos report carries a CVSS score plus our own note on business context, since a technically medium-severity bug on a system holding regulated data can matter more than a high-severity bug on an internal tool.

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    Smart contract audits start with automated static analysis (Slither, Mythril) to catch known vulnerability classes fast, then move to Foundry invariant fuzzing that runs millions of randomized transaction sequences to surface unexpected state transitions, then a manual review pass reading every function against the intended economic design. Reentrancy, access-control gaps and oracle manipulation are the classes we see most often, consistent with Immunefi crypto-loss data.

  • Copy link Copies a direct link to this answer to your clipboard.

    When there is no live attack surface to test (pre-MVP, no users yet), when the budget only covers the test and not the engineer time to fix what it finds, or when the ask is really for a clean-looking report rather than an honest one. In those cases we recommend a cheaper threat-model session, or we say wait until there is something real to test.

Sources and references

Testing methodologies, severity-scoring standards and exploit-data sources referenced throughout this guide.

Published record

Published Pharos research

Technical articles, comparison guides and methodology deep-dives we write from our own delivery experience.

Security engagement cost estimator

Estimate cost, Year-1 ops, time-to-deliverable and required expert headcount for pentest, red-team, SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI-DSS, IR retainer and MDR engagements. Directional only.

Last reviewed . Engagement ranges reflect pricing posts from Trail of Bits, NCC Group, Cure53, Bishop Fox, AICPA SOC 2 cost surveys and ENISA Threat Landscape. See disclaimer below.

Industry context

Estimates based on 2024-2026 industry pricing posts from Trail of Bits, NCC Group, Cure53, Bishop Fox, AICPA SOC 2 cost surveys, ISO 27001 certification body fee schedules and ENISA Threat Landscape. Pentest scope, attestation rigor and incident-response SLAs vary materially. Final pricing requires threat model and scoping discovery.

Dmytro Nasyrov, Founder and CTO at Pharos Production
Dmytro Nasyrov Founder & CTO Let’s work together!

Your business results matter

Achieve them with minimized risk through our bespoke innovation capabilities

Your contact details
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Please enter your message
* required

We typically reply within 4 hours. Prefer email? [email protected]

What happens next?

  1. Contact us

    Contact us today to discuss your project. We’re ready to review your request promptly and guide you on the best next steps for collaboration

    Same day
  2. NDA

    We’re committed to keeping your information confidential, so we’ll sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement

    1 day
  3. Plan the Goals

    After we chat about your goals and needs, we’ll craft a comprehensive proposal detailing the project scope, team, timeline and budget

    3-5 days
  4. Finalize the Details

    Let’s connect on Google Meet to go through the proposal and confirm all the details together!

    1-2 days
  5. Sign the Contract

    As soon as the contract is signed, our dedicated team will jump into action on your project!

    Same day

Our offices

Headquarters in Las Vegas, Nevada. Engineering office in Kyiv, Ukraine.

We also work with clients through dedicated local teams in Las Vegas, New York and San Francisco.

Las Vegas, United States

Headquarters PT
5348 Vegas Dr, Las Vegas, Nevada 89108, United States

Kyiv, Ukraine

Engineering office EET (UTC+2)
44-B Eugene Konovalets Str. Suite 201, Kyiv 01133, Ukraine