A clear system boundary
List the applications, APIs, identities, environments, and exclusions. Explain how the tested scope relates to the system described in your audit.
SOC 2 penetration testing assesses the applications and systems in your audit boundary and produces evidence for your control evaluation. Balhence confirms findings by hand, explains their business impact, and documents agreed re-tests. Your auditor determines how that evidence supports the Trust Services Criteria.
SOC 2 uses risk-based criteria, rather than a universal list of prescribed tests. Penetration testing can support your monitoring and vulnerability-management controls, but the appropriate scope, cadence, and evidence depend on your systems, risks, and control commitments. Confirm these with your auditor before booking.
A scanner can help identify issues. Manual testing adds review of business logic, permissions, and the impact of a confirmed weakness. Read how to plan pentest evidence for SOC 2.
List the applications, APIs, identities, environments, and exclusions. Explain how the tested scope relates to the system described in your audit.
Document test dates, access levels, manual coverage, confirmed impact, and the limitations of the assessment.
Keep findings, owners, decisions, and re-test outcomes together. An untested fix must remain marked as unverified.
The agreed boundary determines the work. Typical starting points include:
| Control area | Possible supporting evidence |
|---|---|
| CC4.1 - control evaluation | An independent technical assessment can inform evaluations of whether controls are functioning. |
| CC7.1 - vulnerability and change detection | Confirmed weaknesses and scope details can inform vulnerability-identification and monitoring activities. |
| Remediation and follow-up | Document the control owner, corrective action, and re-test result against the controls in your own program. |
This is an illustrative mapping, not an attestation. The AICPA Trust Services Criteria define the criteria; your controls and audit determine how the evidence is used.
Bring the system description, the controls the assessment should support, and the date your reviewer needs the evidence. Identify the applications, APIs, user roles, tenants, environments, and supporting systems that belong in the boundary.
Agree who can authorize testing, who owns remediation, and how much time engineering needs before a re-test. Share your reviewer's reporting requirements during scoping so the proposal records them explicitly.
A useful brief separates the test window, report delivery, remediation period, and re-test deadline. These milestones help your team compare proposals on the same basis. When your milestones are clear, request a scoped SOC 2 proposal.
Reserve time for access setup, fieldwork, the report, engineering fixes, and the agreed re-test. Share the review date and observation period during scoping. We confirm availability after reviewing the boundary and access; an enquiry does not reserve a start date.
The re-test record describes the checks performed and their outcome. It does not certify that the system is free of vulnerabilities.
No. A pentest supplies technical evidence for your audit. Your auditor evaluates the overall controls and determines the audit outcome.
Yes. Type 1 addresses controls at a specified date; Type 2 also examines their operation over a period. Agree when the assessment and re-test should occur with your auditor.
Yes. We can discuss the proposed boundary and dependencies, then confirm the written scope and authorization before testing.
Set the cadence from your risk assessment, documented controls, customer commitments, and auditor input. Review it after significant changes. SOC 2 does not impose one universal annual pentest schedule.
Tell us about the systems, roles, integrations, and deadline. We will confirm scope, availability, written authorization, and deliverables before testing.