Awareness and training
Most breaches do not start at the firewall, they start in a line of code: a missing validation, a badly built query, an outdated library. Training whoever writes the code to write it securely is the cheapest way to close those doors, long before an attacker or an audit finds them. Secure development training takes your teams from "it works" to "it works and it cannot be broken", with OWASP, real cases and practice on their own code.
Training for development teams, across Spain.
Why
You can harden the network and still leave the door open in a line of code. Training the programmers closes the problem at its source.
A missing validation, a badly built query, an old dependency. That is where a good part of attacks begin.
The same flaw costs a fraction if it is avoided when writing than if it blows up in production. The sooner, the cheaper.
Much of what comes out of an audit could have been prevented at the keyboard, with a habit and a bit of judgement.
ISO 27001 and NIS2 demand secure development and trained teams, not just good intentions. And you have to prove it.
What is included
No generic slides. Practice with your languages and your vulnerabilities, so that what is learned is applied when you go back to the editor.
The Top 10 and the vulnerabilities that really show up, explained with examples that are recognisable.
Your languages and frameworks, not generic theory. That way the jump from the classroom to the code is direct.
Labs with real code: finding the vulnerability, understanding it and fixing it with your hands.
Secure coding as routine: assume the worst case, trust no input and write secure code by default.
How to look at code (your own and your colleague's, also the AI-generated one) with a security eye.
Training right where the pentest finds the flaws, so they do not come back.
The approach
The later a flaw is found, the more it costs to close: in production it is worth far more than in a review, and in a review more than when writing the line.
That is why the training does not aim for the team to memorise OWASP, it aims for them to write thinking like an attacker would think and to anticipate the flaw from the design, what is called threat modeling.
When that mindset becomes a habit, the code reaches production clean, the pentest finds less and the audit stops hurting. Security stops being a patch at the end and becomes part of how it is built, across the whole development life cycle.
The difference
Knowing what a SQL injection is is not enough. You have to be able to see it and fix it in your code, which is where it shows up.
OWASP theory, slides and a test. It covers the paperwork, but the developer goes back to their code and does not know where to start.
Labs with your languages and your real vulnerabilities: finding and fixing for real. That is what sinks in and changes the habit.
When
And you want it to come out secure by default, not have to patch it afterwards.
Flaws that repeat release after release and that are prevented by training the team.
Standards that require secure development and being able to prove the team is trained.
Talented people that nobody has brought up to date on security, and you bear the risk.
Method
We look at your stack, how you develop and which flaws the pentest keeps repeating on you.
We set up the labs with your languages and the risks that touch you the most.
Hands-on sessions, finding and fixing vulnerabilities in real code.
We track what sinks in and check that those flaws stop showing up.
Fits with
Secure development training closes the loop with offensive security: the pentest finds the flaws and the training teaches how not to repeat them. And it sits within an awareness programme that covers the whole organisation.
For the rest of the staff there is general training, and everything leaves the secure development evidence that ISO 27001 and NIS2 demand.
Questions
The ones you use. We adapt the training to your real stack, whether backend, frontend, mobile or API, with examples in your own languages and frameworks. It is not generic theory that nobody later knows how to apply to their own code.
No. It is hands-on: labs and real code where developers find the vulnerability and fix it with their own hands. The OWASP theory is there, but in service of the practice, not the other way around.
Yes. Both ISO 27001 and NIS2 require secure software development and training for the technical team, and being able to prove it. The training leaves a record of who has been trained in what, exactly the evidence an audit asks for.
No, they complement each other. The pentest finds the vulnerabilities that are already there; secure development training prevents them from coming back. The ideal is to train right where the pentest points out the recurring flaws.
Little, and in a hands-on format. They are short, applied sessions that fit between sprints, without stopping development. That time is far cheaper than fixing the same vulnerability in production.
Yes. More and more code is written with AI assistants, and that code also carries vulnerabilities. We teach how to review it with a security mindset instead of accepting it blindly.
Would your code survive a pentest?
Tell us which stack you work with and what worries you. We set up hands-on training on your own code so the flaw never reaches production.
Get in touch