Security that is built in — not bolted on.
We accompany your software from the first threat model to the signed release. With STRIDE, OWASP, ISO/IEC 27034, SLSA — and mapping to CRA, NIS2, DORA, and EU AI Act. Application security as an engineering discipline, not as audit theater.
Application security doesn't fail because of tools. It fails on timing.
In most organizations, security only enters the picture at the very end — as the bouncer in front of the release. The result: expensive rework, frustrated developers, patchy compliance. We see three structural patterns again and again.
Security as the bouncer
The pen test only happens shortly before go-live. Findings land weeks after the merge. Fixes turn into hotfixes. Nobody wants to raise security topics anymore, because they delay the release.
Fragmented responsibility
Dev, AppSec, compliance, audit, legal — four languages, four tools, four Excel lists. Each group knows one part, nobody sees the whole. Anyone who wants a consistent security picture of a product has to build it manually.
Compliance without evidence
SBOMs are created manually. Threat models live in a Confluence from 2022. Audits become an archaeology exercise. With CRA, NIS2, DORA, and EU AI Act, that won't be enough in 24 months.
“Secure software is not an audit result. It is a development discipline — one you have to build in before the first commit is made.”
Security in every phase. Not just in one.
The Secure Software Development Lifecycle (SSDLC) is not an additional pipeline — it is the right pipeline. We embed security activities across all seven phases, with clearly defined artifacts and gates.
Security Requirements Engineering
Protection-needs analysis, regulatory requirements, use and misuse cases. Security and privacy objectives are written into the requirements on equal footing with business goals — not as an appendix.
Threat Modeling — STRIDE & MAESTRO
We model threats before the first line of code is written. STRIDE for classic systems, MAESTRO for AI components. The result: prioritized mitigations, documented design decisions, an audit-proof threat register.
Secure Coding & Developer Enablement
Coding guidelines, secure defaults, pull-request templates with security checks. Hands-on training that developers actually attend. Pair reviews with AppSec for critical paths. Security becomes part of the engineering culture.
SAST · SCA · Secret Scanning
Static code analysis, software composition analysis, and secret scanning as blocking gates in every pipeline. Findings are prioritized and contextualized — no 5,000-finding reports, but manageable backlogs.
Penetration Tests & DAST
Structured pen tests along OWASP ASVS, MASVS, and ISVS. Dynamic Application Security Testing in staging, with ML-driven test selection. Insights flow back into the threat model and secure coding guides.
SBOM · Provenance · Release Gate
Every artifact generates an SBOM and provenance. Open Policy Agent checks compliance before every production deploy. The approver cannot be the author. Signed releases, a traceable build chain, SLSA Level 3 as the goal.
Runtime Monitoring & Vulnerability Management
Anomaly detection against a behavior baseline. CVE triaging with asset context. Incident playbooks that align with DORA Art. 17 and NIS2 reporting obligations. A vulnerability lifecycle through to the verified fix.
Governance, Audit & KPIs
What isn't measurable doesn't get better. We define security KPIs (MTTR, Mean Time to Detect, backlog aging, test coverage), deliver dashboards for the board and the auditor — and automate evidence collection across the entire pipeline.
Drei Artefakte, sieben Phasen.
Vom ersten Threat Model über SAST-Gate bis zum signierten Release — alles maschinen-prüfbar, alles audit-fest.
We believe that application security is created not through more tools, but through clear responsibility, activities that can be embedded in every phase, and evidence, that the auditor sees before they even ask.
Standards that work.
We don't rely on invented methods, but on established standards — and combine them into a consistent framework for your domain.
From the STRIDE threat model in the architecture to SLSA hardening of the build pipeline. From OWASP ASVS for web back ends to MASVS for mobile apps and AISVS for AI components. Standards are the language in which audit, board, and engineering understand one another.
One SSDLC. Four regulations. One audit repo.
CRA, NIS2, DORA, and the EU AI Act all intervene directly in the software development process. Whoever sets up the SSDLC cleanly meets the obligations simultaneously — instead of maintaining four parallel compliance processes.
Security by design, SBOM, incident reporting, updates for 10 years, vulnerability management. Anchored in the SSDLC through threat modeling (Phase 2), SAST/SCA (Phase 4), SBOM & signing (Phase 6), vulnerability management (Phase 7).
Risk management, supply chain security, audit trails, reporting obligations within 24 / 72 h. In the SSDLC: RBAC and audit logs in the pipeline, signed builds, automated incident routing.
ICT risk management, resilience testing, third-party oversight (financial sector). In the SSDLC: chaos engineering and recovery drills in Run, provenance across the build chain, vendor scanning on every dependency.
For high-risk AI: lifecycle documentation, data quality, human oversight. In the SSDLC: MAESTRO threat modeling for AI components, AISVS tests, model cards as an artifact in every pipeline.
Secure the supply chain. SLSA as the standard.
Most of the attacks of recent years — from SolarWinds to xz-utils — came through the build and dependency chain. SLSA (Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts) is the framework we use to harden this chain step by step: signed provenance, isolated builds, reproducible artifacts.
We typically bring SSDLC teams to SLSA Level 2 within 6–12 months; Level 3 is the goal for CRA- and DORA-regulated products.
Sicherer Code. By Design, nicht per Zufall.
Die meisten Breaches beginnen in einer einzigen Zeile Code. Wir finden Schwachstellen, bevor Angreifer es tun — mit Threat Modeling, Secure Code Review, statischer Analyse und Penetration Testing.
Geprüft nach OWASP ASVS, ISO/IEC 27034 und dem OpenSSF Secure Coding Standard — mit priorisierten, sofort umsetzbaren Findings.
Der OWASP Developer Guide. Die Landkarte für sicheren Code.
Das offizielle Navigationssystem durch das OWASP-Universum: über 40 Projekte, jeder SSDLC-Phase zugeordnet — von ASVS und Threat Dragon über CycloneDX bis WSTG und OpenCRE, aufgebaut auf OWASP SAMM.
Wir machen den herstellerneutralen Open-Source-Guide für Ihr Unternehmen nutzbar — auditfest und gemappt auf NIS2, CRA, DORA und ISO/IEC 27001.
SAMM Self-Assessment. Messen Sie Ihre SSDLC-Reife.
Mit welchem Reifegrad entwickelt Ihre Organisation sichere Software? Unser kostenloses Self-Assessment-Tool führt Sie durch das OWASP Software Assurance Maturity Model (SAMM) — über alle 5 Business Functions und 15 Security Practices hinweg.
Direkt im Browser ausfüllen, Ergebnisse als Report exportieren und per JSON-Import jederzeit fortsetzen oder mit dem nächsten Assessment vergleichen — so sehen Sie schwarz auf weiß, wo Ihr SSDLC steht und welche Hebel zuerst zählen.
OWASP ISVS Gap Analysis
Alongside ASVS (Web) and MASVS (Mobile), the OWASP IoT Security Verification Standard covers connected products. With our free tool, you can assess ISVS Levels 1 to 3 — complete with a maturity radar, gap heatmap, and a management-ready report.
- 149 verification aspects
- 5 ISVS chapters
- Levels 1–3
- Management report
OWASP SCVS Gap Analysis
How secure is your software supply chain? The OWASP Software Component Verification Standard (SCVS) examines components, SBOM, build integrity, and provenance. With our free tool, you can assess your supply chain maturity across SCVS Levels 1 to 3.
- 6 control families
- SBOM & provenance
- Levels 1–3
- Management report
Depth over breadth. Practice over theory.
We are not generalists who can do a bit of everything. Application security and the SSDLC have been our core business for over two decades.
Three steps. Measurable progress.
We don't start with a 200-page concept, but with an honest assessment of where you stand. After that, we plan together — step by step, with concrete artifacts at the end of each phase.
Diagnosis
Where do you stand today? We map your current application security maturity along OWASP SAMM and find the three levers with the highest ROI.
- SAMM assessment
- Threat model review of existing systems
- Compliance gap analysis
- Quick-win roadmap (30 days)
Hardening
We anchor the security activities where they belong — in the phases, in the tools, in the teams. With clear responsibilities and automated gates.
- Threat modeling in the architecture workflow
- SAST/SCA gates in pipelines
- SBOM and provenance generation
- Secure coding guides & dev training
Scaling
A pilot application becomes the standard approach for the entire portfolio. KPIs become visible, audits become predictable, releases become calmer.
- Self-service templates for dev teams
- Executive security dashboards
- SLSA L3 hardening across production
- Audit-ready for CRA, NIS2, DORA
Bevor du losläufst.
Was Teams am häufigsten zum SSDLC fragen — kompakt beantwortet.
Nein. Ein SSDLC sitzt oberhalb Ihres bestehenden Stacks. Wir nutzen Ihre vorhandenen SAST/SCA-Tools, Repos und Pipelines weiter — wir verbinden sie zu einem konsistenten Prozess mit klaren Gates und Artefakten.
Beide. Security definiert die Standards und Gates, Dev verankert die Aktivitäten in der täglichen Arbeit. AppSec ist der Brückenkopf. Wir helfen, die Verantwortlichkeiten klar zu definieren und automatisierte Gates zu etablieren — damit Security nicht zum Bottleneck wird.
Erste Quick Wins in 30 Tagen (SAMM-Assessment, Top-3-Hebel, automatisierte Pipeline-Gates). Spürbare Reduktion von Hotfixes und Release-Verzögerungen in 3–6 Monaten. Audit-Reife für CRA/NIS2/DORA in 6–12 Monaten je nach Ausgangslage.
Ein gut aufgesetzter SSDLC erfüllt alle vier Regularien gleichzeitig — siehe unsere Compliance-Mapping-Sektion. CRA fordert Security-by-Design, SBOM und Updates; NIS2 fordert Risikomanagement und Lieferkettensicherheit; DORA fordert ICT-Resilienz; AI Act fordert Lifecycle-Doku für High-Risk-Systeme. Alle vier werden im SSDLC durch Threat Modeling, SAST/SCA, SBOM-Signing und Runtime-Monitoring abgedeckt.
Realistisch: Wir starten mit dem, was da ist. Erst Inventarisierung und Threat Modeling, dann schrittweise Pipeline-Hardening. Auch ohne moderne CI/CD lassen sich SBOM, Schwachstellen-Management und Audit-Trails einführen — über Wrapper-Skripte und Out-of-Band-Scans.
SLSA L3 ist das Ziel für regulierte Branchen (CRA, DORA). Für die meisten Organisationen ist L2 ein guter erster Meilenstein in 6 Monaten. L3 erfordert isolierte Builds, signierte Provenance und Two-Person-Approval — wir planen den Weg dorthin stufenweise.
Let's talk about your application security.
A 30-minute initial consultation. We listen, assess, and tell you honestly whether we can help. And if we can't — we'll tell you who can do it better. No pitch.