01
Authorization & ownership
Cross-user data access, tenant isolation failures, privileged actions, and missing ownership validation.
One critical workflow review for SaaS teams
Review one critical SaaS workflow before logic risk reaches customers.
Ceryvon reviews a tightly scoped workflow for business logic, authorization, ownership, transaction order, and state consistency risks.
Modern SaaS buyers already ask for compliance reports. The next question is whether critical workflows have been independently reviewed for authorization, ownership, tenant boundaries, workflow order, and state consistency.
Read the synthetic sample report
Staging-firstAuthorized scope only
Evidence-basedNo false certainty
Developer-readyActionable remediation
Confidential review methodology
Business logic
Authorization
Workflow integrity
Evidence discipline
Remediation
Workflow assurance gap
Compliance is not workflow assurance.
SOC 2, ISO 27001, and penetration tests are important trust signals. But high-impact SaaS incidents often happen inside product-specific workflows: refunds, approvals, subscriptions, user invitations, tenant access, integrations, and AI agent actions. Ceryvon focuses on these workflow-level authorization and business logic risks.
Questions your customers may start asking
- Do you perform independent authorization and business logic reviews on critical workflows?
- Which workflows have been reviewed beyond generic automated checks and infrastructure compliance?
- How do you validate tenant isolation, ownership, approval state, replay protection, and workflow order for high-impact actions?
- Has your billing, refund, user invitation, customer data access, or admin workflow been externally reviewed?
- Can you provide a recent focused workflow review summary or remediation record?
Best-fit pilot
Best for teams with one workflow that matters.
Ceryvon is strongest when a small set of roles can trigger a high-impact outcome: refund, approval, booking, tenant access, support action, or AI-agent operation.
Strong fit
- B2B SaaS with roles, tenants, approvals, payments, bookings, or support actions
- Marketplace, e-commerce, CRM, support, workflow, or integration platforms
- Teams with staging/test access and a clearly owned critical workflow
Not the right scope
- Full application pentest, infrastructure review, source-code audit, or broad compliance program work
- Unbounded production testing, phishing or social manipulation, load testing, or broad vulnerability discovery
- Requests without written authorization or a safe test environment
60-second synthetic case
See how a cross-module state gap becomes a duplicate refund risk.
A fictional NexaFlow Commerce workflow shows how CRM approval, order eligibility, payment state, ownership, and tenant context can drift apart—and how the final endpoint can enforce too little.
Synthetic scenario only. It does not describe a vulnerability found in a real company.
Why Ceryvon
A secure-looking workflow can still produce the wrong outcome.
Ceryvon focuses on application-specific decisions that generic automated checks often do not model: who can do what, in which order, on whose data, and in which state.
02
Workflow integrity
Skipped approvals, invalid state transitions, repeated actions, and broken cancellation or booking flows.
03
Payments & transactions
Duplicate refunds, inconsistent payment states, replay risks, and credits applied in the wrong state.
04
AI agent permissions
Automated actions beyond intended permissions, sensitive data exposure, and unintended workflow execution.
How it works
A tightly scoped audit, built around evidence.
Define one critical workflow
We agree on a narrow, authorized scope in staging or a dedicated test environment.
Review logic and authorization risk
Ceryvon combines structured analysis with expert review. Internal review logic and implementation details remain confidential.
Separate signals from findings
Potential issues are not presented as confirmed vulnerabilities without sufficient evidence.
Deliver remediation-ready results
Leadership gets a clear risk summary; technical teams get context and next steps.
Deliverables
Not just findings. A decision and remediation package.
Every engagement is designed to help both decision-makers and developers move quickly.
01
Executive risk summaryBusiness impact, severity, affected workflow, and recommended action.
02
Evidence-based findingsExpected behavior, observed behavior, verification status, and supporting evidence.
03
Developer-ready remediationPractical server-side checks, workflow controls, and retest criteria.
04
One retestA focused verification pass after remediation within the agreed scope.
05
Customer-safe workflow review summaryA focused review record that can support enterprise sales or trust conversations when appropriate.
Ceryvon Logic Risk Pilot
Start with one workflow. Keep the scope controlled.
A focused pilot for SaaS teams that want to evaluate the service with limited risk and commitment.
Discuss a pilot scopePilot scope3–5business days
- One critical workflow
- Up to three user roles
- Staging or authorized test environment
- One retest included
- Written authorization required
Trust by design
Strict authorization, evidence, and confidentiality discipline.
Written authorization
No testing begins without an agreed scope and explicit permission.
Staging-first
A dedicated test environment is preferred wherever possible.
Data minimization
Minimum necessary access, redaction, limited retention, and secure deletion.
Confidential methodology
Ceryvon uses a structured review methodology. Internal review logic and implementation details remain confidential.
Founder-led audit practice
Direct accountability from scope to retest.
Ceryvon is an independent, founder-led audit practice focused on business logic and authorization risks in SaaS workflows. Akif Aydın leads discovery, scope control, evidence review, reporting, and customer delivery.
Akif AydınFounder & Lead Reviewer
akif@ceryvon.com
FAQ
Clear scope. No exaggerated claims.
Is Ceryvon automated testing software?
No. Ceryvon is an expert-led audit service for defined business logic and authorization workflows.
Is this the same as SOC 2 or a penetration test?
No. SOC 2 and penetration tests are valuable, but they answer different questions. Ceryvon focuses on one product-specific workflow and reviews whether authorization, ownership, tenant boundaries, workflow order, replay protection, and state consistency hold together in that workflow.
Do you test production systems?
The preferred environment is staging or a dedicated authorized test environment. Production is considered only when explicitly authorized and safely scoped.
What are the limits of a focused workflow review?
Ceryvon clearly communicates scope, confidence, findings, and residual risk. Results apply to the agreed workflow, roles, environment, and test window.
Pilot readiness
A strong request starts with four clear details.
You do not need to prepare a security package before contacting Ceryvon. A short workflow description is enough if these basics are clear.
Workflow
Which final action matters: refund, approval, cancellation, invitation, tenant access, or agent action?
Roles
Which users or teams can start, approve, reject, repeat, or finalize the workflow?
Safe environment
Is there a staging, test, sandbox, or isolated demo environment with synthetic data?
Decision path
Who should confirm scope, authorize testing, and review a fixed-scope proposal?
Pilot scope review
Choose one critical workflow.
Tell us which workflow matters, which roles are involved, and whether a staging or test environment is available. If it fits, we will reply with a narrow and safe pilot scope.
No testing is performed from this form. Written authorization and scope agreement are required before any assessment.
Prefer email? hello@ceryvon.com