Coverage
Representative engagements
Mix of implementation work and security hardening, written at the level a technical buyer can evaluate quickly.
Mobile Auth Hardening for a Launch-Stage App
System: Two mobile clients were sharing account logic with a backend that had diverged over time.
Failure mode: Login, session invalidation, and recovery behavior no longer matched across app and backend.
What we changed: Reworked token and session handling end to end and tightened backend checks on sensitive transitions.
Outcome: Launch went out with fewer auth edge-case surprises and clearer account controls.
Backend/API Stabilization Under Production Load
System: A live account platform was seeing failures when traffic spiked and workflows crossed service boundaries.
Failure mode: Authorization checks were inconsistent and failure behavior differed by endpoint.
What we changed: Standardized enforcement logic, cleaned up boundary checks, and repaired failure handling in high-risk paths.
Outcome: Production behavior became more predictable and misuse paths were reduced.
Release Integrity Review for a Mobile Product
System: A mobile team was shipping an important release and did not trust its own go or no-go signals.
Failure mode: Artifact checks, signing assumptions, and rollback paths had never been reviewed together.
What we changed: Hardened build and deploy controls, clarified rollback criteria, and tightened release runbook decisions.
Outcome: Release decisions became clearer and rollback readiness improved before shipment.
Product Abuse Review for Account Workflows
System: Registration, recovery, and support actions were creating account-risk side effects.
Failure mode: Abuse paths were known anecdotally but not mapped to explicit backend controls.
What we changed: Mapped attacker workflows and translated them into enforceable product and backend invariants.
Outcome: Account workflows became harder to abuse and easier to reason about.
Mobile Architecture Refactor for a Fragile Client
System: A shipped app had reached the point where routine changes caused regressions.
Failure mode: Architecture boundaries were weak and delivery-critical code was tightly coupled.
What we changed: Refactored client boundaries and stabilized release-critical flows before adding new work.
Outcome: The team regained delivery speed without the same level of release risk.
AI Runtime Hardening for Tool-Using Workflows
System: An AI-assisted workflow could invoke tools with weak action boundaries.
Failure mode: Identity assumptions, tool authorization, and runtime guardrails were under-specified.
What we changed: Tightened authorization boundaries and runtime controls around tool execution paths.
Outcome: Misuse risk dropped and behavior was easier to validate before release.
Next step
Need help on a similar product, platform, or security problem?
If one workflow in your product feels brittle, bring that first. We can scope from there.
Related paths
Use projects as a routing layer
From proof, jump directly into service selection, methodology, or intake.
Next best action