
Hoplon InfoSec
03 Jan, 2026
I have lost count of how many times a team confidently told me, “Our app is safe, we already tested it.”
Then ten minutes later, I was staring at exposed APIs or sensitive data sitting unencrypted on the device.
Mobile apps today are not just apps. They are wallets, health records, work tools, and identity hubs. When something goes wrong, users do not blame the attacker. They blame the app.
That is why mobile application security testing matters far more than most teams realize.
There was a time when mobile apps were simple. A login screen, a few screens, maybe some local storage. That time is gone.
Modern apps talk constantly to APIs, cloud services, analytics tools, payment gateways, and third-party SDKs. Each connection is another opportunity for something to go wrong.
Mobile application security testing exists to answer one uncomfortable question.
“What happens if someone actively tries to break this app?”
Most breaches do not happen because attackers are brilliant. They happen because basic protections were missing.
This is not about movie-style hacking.
Common problems I still see today include hardcoded API keys, weak authentication flows, insecure local storage, and blind trust in the client-side app. These issues are consistently documented in the OWASP Mobile Top 10, and yet they continue to appear in production apps.
Attackers look for easy wins. Mobile apps often provide them.
Many teams only think about security when their app gets rejected by Google Play or the Apple App Store.
Both platforms enforce security and privacy rules, even if they do not publish exact rejection statistics. Based on developer discussions and policy updates, insecure data handling and weak authentication are frequent causes of rejection.
Mobile application security testing before submission saves time, money, and frustration.
There is a big misunderstanding in the industry. Running a scanner is not the same as security testing.
Proper mobile application security testing looks at how the app behaves, how it communicates, and how it can be abused.
It examines authentication, session handling, encryption, API usage, and business logic. It also looks at what happens when someone intentionally uses the app in the wrong way.
This approach aligns with OWASP MASVS testing, which is widely respected across the security community.
Android and iOS face similar threats, but they fail in different ways.
Android app security testing often focuses on exported components, insecure intents, file permissions, and device fragmentation issues. The open nature of Android increases flexibility but also risk.
iOS app security testing usually dives deeper into keychain usage, secure storage, jailbreak detection, and runtime protections. Apple’s ecosystem helps, but it does not guarantee safety.
Mobile application security testing must respect these differences instead of using a single generic checklist.

Automated tools are helpful. They are fast and scalable. They also miss important things.
Manual mobile application penetration testing finds logic flaws that tools simply cannot understand. Things like privilege escalation, broken authorization, or workflow abuse usually require human thinking.
In real-world assessments, the most serious findings almost always come from manual testing.
The strongest testing programs use both, not one or the other.
OWASP MASVS is not a regulation. It is a benchmark.
It gives teams a shared language for security requirements. Developers, testers, and managers can all align around the same expectations.
Using OWASP MASVS testing does not make an app invincible. It makes the risks visible, which is far more valuable.
Mobile application security testing for fintech apps and healthcare apps carries higher stakes.
Fintech apps deal with payments and personal finance. Healthcare apps handle sensitive health information. A single mistake can lead to legal issues, fines, or permanent loss of trust.
Exact compliance requirements vary by region and regulation, and legal advice should always be confirmed separately. What is clear is that security failures in these industries are rarely forgiven.
Some patterns never change.
Hardcoded credentials. Trusting client-side validation. No API rate limiting. Weak session handling.
These are not advanced mistakes. They are basic ones. And they are exactly why mobile application security testing exists.
This question comes up in every conversation.
There is no fixed price. Costs depend on app complexity, platforms, and depth of testing. Most vendors do not publish public pricing, so exact figures cannot be verified.
What I can say confidently is this. The cost of a breach is almost always higher than the cost of testing.
Once is not enough.
Security testing should happen before launch, after major updates, and whenever new features or third-party services are added.
Mobile application security testing works best when it is continuous, not reactive.
I once worked with a startup that thought its app was secure because it passed automated scans. A manual review found a broken authorization check in the API.
Anyone could access another user’s data.
That issue was fixed in a day. The damage it could have caused would have lasted for years.
Ignore flashy promises.
Look for clear explanations, realistic risk descriptions, and reports that make sense to non-technical teams. A good mobile security testing company helps you understand risk, not panic over it.
Security is not just a testing problem.
Secure mobile app development, safe API design, and regular reviews matter just as much. Testing confirms whether those efforts are working.
Mobile application security testing should support developers, not slow them down.

What is mobile application security testing?
It is the process of finding and fixing security weaknesses in mobile apps across Android and iOS using manual and automated methods.
How often should mobile apps be tested?
Best practice suggests before release and after major changes. High-risk apps should test more frequently.
Are automated tools enough?
No. They help, but manual testing is essential for real-world attack scenarios.
Is security testing required for app store approval?
Security compliance is enforced through app review policies, even if testing is not explicitly named.
Most mobile apps are not attacked because they are famous. They are attacked because they are easy.
Mobile application security testing turns unknown risks into known ones. And known risks can be fixed.
If your app handles real user data, security is not optional. It is part of the product.
Do not wait for users or attackers to discover the problem first.
Share this :