Secure Mobile App Development & Hardening
Native or hybrid mobile engineering for applications that handle money, identity or sensitive data — built against an explicit mobile threat model, with anti-tamper posture, secure update strategy and release hardening designed in.
Verified Solvex Specialist
Verified by SolvexDirect specialist contact for Solvex engagements
What this means. An authorized Solvex administrator registered and approved this exact public identity. What it does not. Solvex has not inspected the account on the platform, and this is not the platform's own verification.
Solvex specialists never ask for your passwords, recovery phrases, one-time codes, or payments to a personal account. Work, scope and invoices are agreed in writing through the official channels on this site.
What's covered
- Mobile threat model for your specific data and user population
- Native (Swift/Kotlin) or hybrid architecture, chosen against the requirement
- Authentication, biometric gating, session lifetime and revocation
- Certificate handling, pinning strategy and transport hardening
- Secure storage: what is stored, where, encrypted how, and what is deliberately not
- API security: authorisation model, replay resistance, rate limiting
- Anti-tamper and root/jailbreak posture, with realistic expectations stated
- Secure update and key-rotation strategy, and release hardening
What you receive
- Application source with the security architecture documented
- Written mobile threat model with the trust boundaries drawn
- Secure storage and transport design notes
- Release hardening checklist and build configuration
- Test suite covering the security-relevant paths
- Handover documentation and engineering walkthrough
Evidence and reporting
How the work is kept honest- Evidence, frozen at issuanceFindings tie to something observed. When the report is issued, the evidence behind it is frozen in the same transaction and cannot be edited afterwards.
- A signed reportAn Ed25519 signature covers both the report content and the delivered file. Alter a byte of either and verification fails.
- Written scope firstAdvisory work runs to a written scope agreed before it starts, so what you receive is what was agreed.
Anyone holding a Solvex report can verify it publicly without seeing its contents.
Our boundaries
What this engagement does not do, stated before it starts.
- Client-side controls can be bypassed by a determined attacker on a device they control — we design assuming that, and never claim otherwise
- Backend authorisation remains the security boundary and is scoped separately unless included
- No DRM, licence enforcement or anti-piracy tooling
- Device-level compromise (malware, physical extraction) is outside the application's control
How this engagement runs
- 01
Intake
Tell us the system, the goal and the constraints. If the work is not a good fit, we say so before anyone is invoiced.
- 02
Scope and authorization
Written scope and signed authorization before anything is touched. Security testing runs only against systems you own or are contractually entitled to have tested.
- 03
Investigation or build
Specialists matched to the work. Findings are proven by hand — scanner output is a lead, never a finding.
- 04
Evidence
Every finding ties to something observed. When a report is issued, its evidence is frozen in the same transaction, so what backed the report cannot change afterwards.
- 05
Delivery
A signed report: an Ed25519 signature over both the content and the file, with a short verification reference you can read down a phone.
- 06
Verification and retest
Anyone holding the report can verify it publicly without seeing its contents. Fixes are retested as part of the engagement — “fixed” means we confirmed it.
Questions we are asked
- Can you make the app impossible to reverse engineer?
- No, and anyone who says otherwise is selling something. An attacker with a rooted device and time will read your binary. What good engineering buys is cost and delay, and — far more importantly — an architecture where reading the client does not hand anyone your users' data, because the server never trusted the client in the first place.
- Native or Flutter?
- It depends on what the app does. Heavy platform integration, strict performance budgets or specialised hardware access favour native. Broad feature parity across platforms with a small team favours Flutter. We recommend against your requirement rather than against our preference.
- Do you also test the app afterwards?
- We can, but we will tell you plainly that a team assessing its own build is a weaker assurance than an independent one. For a formal assurance result we recommend our mobile penetration test run by engineers who were not on the build.
Related services
Engineering
Flutter Cross-Platform App Development
Production Flutter engineering for Android, iOS and web from one codebase — built by a security company, so authentication, secure storage, API hardening and release integrity are part of the architecture rather than a later remediation cycle.
Offensive / Testing
Mobile Application Penetration Testing
Your mobile app runs on devices you don't control. We test iOS and Android builds for insecure storage, weak crypto, and backend flaws, covering the app, its APIs and the data it leaves behind.
Engineering
Secure API & Backend Engineering
Backend and API systems engineered around the authorisation model rather than around the endpoints — with schema validation, rate limiting, idempotent workflows and audit logging that make abuse expensive and incidents reconstructible.