
- Client
- Kintavo
- Industry
- Regulated SaaS · eQMS & compliance
- Engagement
- Ongoing · 3+ years
- QA team
- 2 security test engineers
- Platforms
- Websites · API · Cloud · Database
- Security Testing
- Vulnerability Assessment
- Penetration Testing
- Compliance Testing
MongoDB
Express
Angular
Node.js
RabbitMQ
Go
Redis
Socket.io
PostgreSQL
OWASP ZAP
SANS 25
NmapNessus
Metasploit
About the project
Kintavo runs the quality system of regulated organizations on one connected platform: document control with e-signatures, training records, CAPAs, deviations, audits, calibration and more — nineteen modules on a single data model, with a shared AI engine and one immutable audit trail. Its users are quality teams in blood centers, hospitals, laboratories and other regulated environments.
In an eQMS, a security failure is a compliance failure. A broken access rule can expose controlled documents, a tampered audit trail undermines 21 CFR Part 11 and GxP evidence, and a leaked record can carry sensitive patient- or donor-related data. The platform runs on a MEAN stack (MongoDB, Express, Angular, Node.js) with Go services, RabbitMQ messaging, Redis caching, Socket.io real-time updates and PostgreSQL — each with its own attack surface.
QAonTOP provides two dedicated security test engineers who run continuous security testing, vulnerability assessment and penetration testing release by release under agreed rules of engagement, and verify the compliance-critical controls regulated customers depend on.
What made this hard
Kintavo sells trust to quality teams and their auditors. Every release had to prove that records stay controlled, signatures stay attributable and the audit trail stays untouchable — across a stack with many moving parts.
- CHALLENGE 01
Audit trails must be tamper-proof
21 CFR Part 11 and EU Annex 11 expect secure, time-stamped audit trails and attributable e-signatures. Any path that edits or bypasses them is a critical finding, not a minor bug.
- CHALLENGE 02
Fine-grained, multi-tenant access
Roles, sites, modules and document states combine into thousands of permission paths. Each needed checking for privilege escalation and cross-tenant data exposure.
- CHALLENGE 03
A polyglot, event-driven stack
Node.js and Go services talk over RabbitMQ, cache in Redis and push updates through Socket.io. Queues, sockets and caches are easy to miss in a web-only pen test.
- CHALLENGE 04
AI features add a new attack surface
AI-assisted drafting and analysis read controlled records. Prompt injection or over-broad retrieval could reveal content a user is not permitted to see.
How QAonTOP tested Kintavo
- 01
Threat-model the platform
Mapped assets, trust boundaries and data flows across the Angular front end, Express and Go APIs, message queues, caches and databases, then ranked them by regulatory impact: audit trail, e-signatures, controlled documents and tenant isolation first.
Tools SANS 25
- 02
Automated scanning every release
OWASP ZAP scans authenticated web and API flows in staging on each release. Nessus scans cloud hosts and services, and Nmap maps exposed ports after infrastructure changes. Findings are triaged against the SANS Top 25 and OWASP Top 10.
Tools OWASP ZAP · Nessus · Nmap
- 03
Manual penetration testing
Engineers test what scanners miss: broken object-level authorization on APIs, role and tenant escalation, e-signature and approval-workflow bypass, and audit-trail tampering. Confirmed issues are exploited in a controlled way with Metasploit to prove real impact.
Tools Metasploit · OWASP ZAP
- 04
Test the event and data layers
RabbitMQ queue permissions and message injection, Socket.io authentication and channel isolation, Redis exposure and cache poisoning, and injection and access controls on MongoDB and PostgreSQL.
Tools RabbitMQ · Socket.io · Redis · MongoDB · PostgreSQL
- 05
Verify, retest and report
Every finding gets a severity, reproduction steps and fix guidance, and is retested before closure. Compliance-critical controls — audit trail, e-signatures, access — are re-verified each cycle, which ends with a report Kintavo can share with customer security and quality reviewers.
Tools Nessus · OWASP ZAP
The engagement in numbers
Continuous security testing, release after release
Dedicated security test engineers
Release-level VAPT cycles completed
Vulnerabilities found and verified fixed
Critical or high findings open at release
Audit-trail and e-signature paths tested every cycle
Before and after the engagement
| Area | Before QAonTOP | With QAonTOP |
|---|---|---|
| Security testing | An annual third-party pen test, with months of changes shipped between assessments. | VAPT on every release cycle: automated scans on each build, manual testing on every new feature. |
| Access control | Permissions checked only through happy-path functional tests. | A role, site and tenant matrix tested for escalation and object-level access on every API that returns controlled records. |
| Audit trail & e-signatures | Assumed secure because the UI did not allow edits. | Direct API, queue and database tampering attempts every cycle, with any bypass treated as a release blocker. |
| Infrastructure | Cloud hosts and exposed services reviewed occasionally. | Nmap and Nessus scans after each infrastructure change, with exposed services tracked to closure. |
| Findings management | Findings delivered in PDFs, and fixes rarely retested. | Every finding logged with severity, reproduction steps and fix guidance, then retested before it is closed. |
| Customer security reviews | Security questionnaires answered from memory. | Current VAPT evidence ready for customers’ IT security and quality reviewers. |
What we covered
Security Testing
Release-by-release security testing of the web app, APIs, message queues, caches and cloud infrastructure.
Vulnerability Assessment
Automated scanning with OWASP ZAP, Nessus and Nmap, triaged against the OWASP Top 10 and SANS Top 25.
Penetration Testing
Manual testing of authorization, tenant isolation, e-signature and audit-trail bypass, with controlled exploitation in Metasploit.
Compliance Testing
Checks of the controls behind 21 CFR Part 11 and EU Annex 11 — audit trails, e-signatures and access — with evidence for customer reviews.