FDA-Compliant Penetration Testing

    Medical Device Penetration TestingWhite-Box, FDA-Ready Reports & Letter of Attestation.

    Struggling to meet the FDA's cybersecurity testing requirements? We identify vulnerabilities and deliver FDA-ready reports - fast, accurate, and aligned with current guidance. We recommend white-box testing for medical devices, and so does the FDA.

    The short answer

    What is medical device penetration testing, and what does the FDA need from it?

    Medical device penetration testing is white-box security testing of a device and everything it connects to - firmware, hardware debug interfaces, wireless radios, the companion app, the APIs, and the cloud back end - run against your source code, architecture, and threat model. For an FDA submission it has to do four things the 2026 premarket guidance calls out: verify security requirements, verify threat mitigations, run vulnerability testing, and run true penetration testing. The deliverable is an FDA-formatted report with CVSS and ISO 14971 patient-harm ratings, threat-model traceability, and a signed Letter of Attestation.

    275+ Devices Secured. Mostly Manual, Expert-Led Testing.

    • White-box recommended
    • Hardware + firmware
    • Companion app & cloud
    • FDA-ready reports
    • Re-test included
    • Free 30-min call
    • No obligation
    • Expert-led from minute one
    • Fixed-fee quote in 24 hours
    • NDA available on request

    Trusted by leading MedTech companies

    Intuitive Surgical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    bioMérieux logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Inogen logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Natera logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Velico Medical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Medivis logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Spiro Robotics logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Nova Biomedical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    VitalConnect logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Intuitive Surgical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    bioMérieux logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Inogen logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Natera logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Velico Medical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Medivis logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Spiro Robotics logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Nova Biomedical logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    VitalConnect logo, Blue Goat Cyber client
    Christian Espinosa, Founder & CEO

    Reviewed by Christian Espinosa, MBA · Founder & CEO

    Last reviewed

    Why Most Pen Testing Fails Medical Devices

    Generic penetration testing firms lack the understanding of unique device architecture, patient risks, and regulatory demands. Their reports may be thorough, but not FDA-compliant - and they almost always default to black-box only.

    Black-box-only testing

    The FDA expects testers to leverage source code, threat models, and architecture (white-box). Black-box-only engagements miss the deep flaws reviewers ask about - and lead to deficiencies.

    Incomplete Testing

    Generic vendors miss firmware, wireless, and embedded paths unique to medical devices.

    Wrong Reporting Format

    Reports without FDA-aligned structure, traceability, and evidence get rejected by reviewers.

    Test depth

    White-box vs gray-box vs black-box

    For medical devices, both Blue Goat and the FDA recommend white-box testing. Reviewers expect testers to leverage source, firmware, and threat models - black-box alone routinely leads to deficiencies.

    CapabilityBlack-boxGray-boxWhite-box
    Source code access
    Firmware / binaries
    Threat model & architecture
    Authenticated test paths
    Deep logic + business-flow flaws
    Aligned with FDA expectations
    Scope coverage per test-day
    Yes Partial No
    References

    Why the FDA and AAMI point to white-box

    Premarket guidance and consensus standards both expect testers to leverage source code, design artifacts, and threat models, not just an external view of the device.

    In their words

    Backed by MedTech leaders.

    "Blue Goat Cyber's depth of expertise was impressive. We had no in-house cybersecurity experience, and their team guided us through every step of the FDA process. The penetration testing and SBOM testing were thorough and gave us complete confidence."
    Hank Tucker
    CEO · MedTech Manufacturer
    Attack surface

    The four types of testing the FDA expects - and the full attack surface

    FDA's Feb 3, 2026 premarket cybersecurity guidance asks for security requirement verification, threat mitigation verification, vulnerability testing, and penetration testing. Every engagement covers all four, mapped to the interfaces a real attacker can reach.

    1. Security requirement verification

    • Authentication and session management against the stated design
    • Authorization, role separation, and privilege boundaries
    • Cryptography in transit and at rest, plus key storage and rotation
    • Secure boot, code signing, and firmware update integrity
    • Audit logging, event forensics, and tamper evidence
    • Every requirement traced back to the threat model and design inputs

    2. Threat mitigation verification

    • Each STRIDE threat from your model exercised against its stated control
    • Abuse cases and misuse cases run to failure, not just happy-path checks
    • Residual risk documented where a mitigation is only partial
    • Patient-harm impact rated under ISO 14971, not just CVSS
    • Multi-patient harm and network-of-devices scenarios
    • Traceability matrix reviewers can audit line by line

    3. Vulnerability testing, SAST and DAST

    • Static application security testing (SAST) and secure code review across firmware and application source
    • Dynamic application security testing (DAST) against running services and web interfaces
    • Software composition analysis and SBOM-driven CVE triage with VEX statements
    • Protocol and input fuzzing across BLE, serial, USB, REST, MQTT, and gRPC
    • Known-vulnerability checks against chipsets, RTOS, kernels, and third-party libraries
    • Malformed input, robustness, and error-handling testing

    4. Penetration testing across the real attack surface

    • Hardware teardown, JTAG/UART/SPI access, firmware extraction and reverse engineering
    • Wireless: BLE pairing and GATT abuse, Wi-Fi (WPA2/WPA3), cellular/NB-IoT, and NFC
    • Mobile companion apps on iOS and Android, including OWASP MASVS coverage
    • Web apps and APIs against OWASP ASVS and the OWASP API Top 10
    • Cloud back end, IAM, tenant isolation, containers, and Kubernetes workloads
    • Interoperability surfaces: DICOM, HL7/FHIR, and hospital network integration
    Attack surface

    What we test in a medical-device pen test

    The full stack a connected medical device exposes - from the clinician portal down to the implant firmware. Every layer is in scope when it matters to patient safety or regulatory submission.

    1. 01Clinician / hospital portal
    2. 02Cloud APIs and data plane
    3. 03Cellular / Wi-Fi backhaul
    4. 04Mobile companion app
    5. 05BLE / RF / wireless telemetry
    6. 06Service / maintenance interfaces
    7. 07Device firmware + OS
    8. 08Internal buses (CAN, EtherCAT, I2C, SPI)
    9. 09Microcontroller boot chain

    Layers shown outermost (top) to innermost (bottom). Dashed rows are part of the surrounding system but out of scope for this view.

    How it works

    How an FDA pen test engagement runs

    Every project gets a dedicated project manager from kickoff to final report, so you always know what is happening and what we need from you.

    1. 01

      Kickoff

      Once the contract is signed, we assign your project manager and hold a kickoff call to confirm scope, dates and contacts.

    2. 02

      Shared workspace

      We set up a private Slack channel for day-to-day questions and secure shares for exchanging documents.

    3. 03

      Intake

      We collect the Instructions for Use (IFU), Software Architecture Document (SAD), hazard analysis and threat model. No threat model yet? We can build one for you.

    4. 04

      Logistics

      We confirm whether devices ship to our lab or we travel to you, and that units, accounts, tools and the test setup are ready.

    5. 05

      First round of testing

      We run the test plan against the exact device version you plan to submit.

    6. 06

      Tear sheet

      You get a short findings summary right after testing, so engineering can start fixing before the full report is done.

    7. 07

      Full report

      Test Plan, Test Cases and Test Report, with every finding traced to a threat and a patient harm, plus the Letter of Attestation.

    8. 08

      Retest until clean

      After each fix we retest and confirm, then update the report so it is ready to submit.

    What's included

    Reviewer-ready deliverables in one engagement

    Every medical device penetration testing engagement ships with the artifacts FDA reviewers expect to see - traceable, complete, and aligned with current guidance.

    • Device, firmware, and embedded testing - hardware teardown, JTAG/UART/SPI bus access, firmware extraction and reverse engineering, and exploitation of the secure boot, debug, and update paths. Done by operators who have tested infusion pumps, monitors, surgical robots, and implantables.
    • Companion app and cloud API coverage - iOS/Android binary analysis, BLE pairing/GATT attacks, REST/MQTT/gRPC fuzzing, authentication and authorization testing, and tenant-isolation checks. We test the device as patients and clinicians actually use it, not in isolation.
    • FDA-ready penetration test reports - executive summary, methodology, CVSS-scored findings tied to your threat model, reproduction steps, and a signed Letter of Attestation covering tester independence, scope, methods, and results. Reviewer-ready, not a generic IT security PDF.
    • Remediation guidance and re-test included - written fix recommendations per finding, engineer-to-engineer support during remediation, and unlimited re-tests of fixed issues inside the fixed fee. You leave with a clean report, not a list of open items.
    Pricing guidance

    Fixed-fee penetration testing pricing

    One fixed fee per engagement. It includes the FDA-formatted report, the signed Letter of Attestation, and retesting of every high and critical finding. You get the exact number in writing within 24 hours of the scoping call.

    Scoped / single surface

    From $15k

    One attack surface: firmware and hardware only, BLE only, or the cloud API only. Best for postmarket validation, closing a specific deficiency, or pre-submission risk reduction.

    • One interface tested to full depth
    • SAST or DAST as the surface requires
    • CVSS and ISO 14971 rated findings
    • Retest of high and critical fixes
    • Letter of Attestation with scope stated

    Connected device (most common)

    $30k - $55k

    Typical Class II connected device: firmware, hardware interfaces, BLE or Wi-Fi, companion app, REST APIs, and cloud back end. Full-attack-surface coverage for a 510(k) or De Novo.

    • All four FDA testing types
    • Firmware, wireless, mobile, API, and cloud
    • SBOM-driven CVE triage and VEX
    • Threat-model traceability matrix
    • Retests of high and critical items
    • eSTAR-ready report and Letter of Attestation

    Platform / PMA ecosystem

    $55k - $95k+

    Class III and PMA submissions, implantables, surgical platforms, multi-device ecosystems, AI/ML inference services, or several products tested in parallel.

    • Everything in connected device
    • Multi-device and hospital-network scenarios
    • Kubernetes and multi-tenant cloud depth
    • DICOM and HL7/FHIR interoperability testing
    • AI/ML model and inference-service abuse cases
    • Coordinated multi-report submission package

    What drives the price

    • Number of distinct interfaces in scope (each radio, app, and API counts)
    • Whether source code, architecture docs, and a threat model are available for white-box depth
    • Hardware sample availability and how many units we can destructively test
    • Cloud complexity: single tenant versus multi-tenant, container and Kubernetes footprint
    • Regulatory pathway - PMA and De Novo submissions carry deeper evidence expectations than 510(k)

    Ranges are typical, not quotes. The $15k starting point assumes a simple device, a reasonable timeline and no travel. Timeline is 3 to 5 weeks for most engagements and 6 to 8 weeks for large ecosystems.

    How much does medical device penetration testing cost? Full breakdown

    Relevant standards

    Standards medical device penetration testing maps to

    Every medical device penetration testing engagement produces evidence aligned to the regulatory and consensus standards FDA reviewers and notified bodies expect to see - traceable, complete, and ready to drop into your ISO 13485 quality system.

    Featured site-wide
    FDA 2026 Guidance Featured

    FDA Premarket Cybersecurity Guidance (Feb 3, 2026)

    Defines the SPDF, Section 524B submission package, threat modeling, SBOM, security architecture views, and cybersecurity testing every cyber device submission must include.

    ANSI/AAMI SW96 Featured

    Medical Device Security Risk Management

    The consensus standard for medical device security risk management - asset, threat, vulnerability, likelihood, severity, and residual risk acceptability.

    ISO 14971 Featured

    Medical Device Risk Management

    Foundational risk management standard. Cybersecurity risk is tied directly to patient-safety risk in the 14971 file.

    IEC 62443-4-1

    Secure Product Development Lifecycle

    Industrial-strength secure-development-lifecycle requirements applied to connected medical devices.

    NIST SP 800-115

    Technical Guide to Information Security Testing

    Reference methodology for planning, executing, and reporting security testing.

    Notable incidents

    Public premarket cybersecurity history

    Recalls, CISA ICS-MA advisories, and disclosed research that shape what reviewers ask about - and what this engagement is built to cover.

    How an engagement runs

    From kickoff to a clean retest in 7 steps

    Every project gets a named project manager. The intake documents in step 2 let us trace each finding to your threat model and rate its risk in terms of patient harm, which is what FDA reviewers look for.

    1. 1

      Kickoff

      Contract signed, project manager assigned, shared Slack channel and secure file shares set up.

    2. 2

      Intake documents

      You send the documents below so every finding traces to a threat and a hazard.

    3. 3

      Logistics

      Test setup, device shipping or on-site travel agreed.

    4. 4

      Testing

      Mostly manual, white-box testing of device, firmware, radios, app and cloud.

    5. 5

      Tear sheet

      Early summary of findings so your engineers can start fixing right away.

    6. 6

      Full report

      FDA-formatted report with CVSS and patient-harm ratings, plus a signed Letter of Attestation.

    7. 7

      Retest

      We retest your fixes until the findings are closed.

    Step 2: what we ask for before testing

    • Instructions for Use (IFU)

      How the device is used and by whom

    • System architecture

      What connects to what

    • Threat model

      What we test against. We can build it if you don't have one.

    • Hazard analysis

      Links each finding to patient harm

    See the full engagement, from first call to postmarket support →

    Traceability

    How each finding traces to patient harm

    A CVSS score says how easy an attack is. It doesn't say whether a patient could be hurt. We link every finding to your threat model and hazard analysis, so its risk is rated in terms of patient harm and FDA reviewers can follow the chain from threat to fix.

    A

    Threat model

    Names the threats and attack paths. Each test case traces back to a threat.

    Threat: an attacker nearby sends commands over Bluetooth without pairing.

    B

    Hazard analysis

    Names what could hurt a patient if the device misbehaves (ISO 14971).

    Hazard: the device delivers the wrong therapy setting.

    1. 1

      Pen test finding

      What we proved during testing, tied to the threat it came from.

      Finding: therapy settings can be changed over Bluetooth without authentication.

    2. 2

      Exploitability

      How easy the attack is, scored with CVSS.

      Low skill needed, attacker must be within Bluetooth range.

    3. 3

      Patient-harm risk

      Exploitability combined with the linked hazard's severity. This rating, not CVSS alone, sets priority.

      Rated high: a wrong therapy setting can harm the patient.

    4. 4

      Fix and retest

      The fix is verified in a retest, and the full chain goes into your FDA report.

      Pairing and command authentication added, retest passes.

    The example lines show an illustrative case, not a specific client engagement.

    Our recommended approach

    Why we lead with white-box for FDA submissions

    White-box is our default for premarket cyber devices - it's the only depth that gives FDA reviewers full coverage evidence. Gray-box adds credentialed ecosystem testing where it matters. Black-box is reserved for specific post-market or adversary-simulation scenarios.

    Devices Secured
    Deficiency Gap Analysis
    Scope Owned In-House
    MedTech Cyber
    Unique deliverable

    A signed Letter of Attestation with every test

    Most pen test firms ship a report. The FDA's premarket guidance asks that penetration testing evidence show who did the testing, how independent and qualified they were, what was in scope, the methods used, and the results. Every Blue Goat engagement includes a signed Letter of Attestation that summarizes exactly that, alongside the full report, with no additional request required.

    What it is

    A signed regulatory artifact

    A signed document from the pen testing firm that names the testers and their independence, states the scope covered (firmware, hardware interfaces, wireless, mobile, APIs, cloud), and summarizes the methods, findings, and the status of each finding.

    Why it helps review

    Easy for reviewers to verify

    The FDA's guidance does not prescribe a specific attestation format, but reviewers regularly ask about tester independence, scope, and methods. A one-page signed summary puts those answers in one place and points to the full report for detail.

    Why most reports don't include one

    Generic IT firms ≠ MedTech

    Generic IT security reports are written for IT audits and often leave out what a medical device submission needs, such as tester independence, threat model traceability, and patient-safety impact. Every Blue Goat Letter of Attestation is signed by the senior engineer who led the test.

    How we stack up

    Blue Goat Cyber vs. typical pen test vendors

    A transparent, side-by-side look at what you actually get - no vague promises.

    Capability
    Blue Goat Cyber
    Typical Vendor
    Technical Capabilities
    12+ Years Exclusively Testing Medical Devices
    Included
    Not offered
    Medical Protocol Testing (DICOM, HL7/FHIR, BLE Medical)
    Included
    Not offered
    Hardware/Firmware Analysis & Protocol Fuzzing
    Included
    Not offered
    Full Ecosystem (Device + Cloud + Mobile App)
    Included
    Partial
    FDA Submission Support
    FDA 2026 Premarket Cybersecurity Guidance Aligned
    Included
    Partial
    eSTAR-Ready FDA Submission Documentation
    Included
    Partial
    Dedicated FDA Deficiency Letter Response
    Included
    Not offered
    Business Terms
    FDA Cybersecurity Deficiency Commitment
    Included
    Not offered
    Fixed-Fee Pricing with Retests Included
    Included
    Not offered
    Senior Expert Leads Your Engagement
    Included
    Partial
    How we cleared real submissions

    Anonymized engagements, from kickoff to FDA clearance

    Class II · 510(k)

    Wearable Cardiac Monitor

    The Problem

    Pre-submission penetration test required, with a tight 6-week window before FDA filing. Prior vendor returned a generic scan report that wouldn't satisfy 2026 guidance.

    Our Testing
    • Firmware extraction and binary analysis
    • BLE pairing and protocol fuzzing
    • Mobile companion app reverse engineering
    • Cloud telemetry API authentication review
    FDA Outcome
    • 11 findings surfaced, 2 critical pre-filing
    • FDA-ready report delivered in 4 weeks
    • 510(k) cleared on first review, no cyber deficiencies
    Class III · PMA

    Implantable Neurostimulator Platform

    The Problem

    Complex multi-component system (implant, programmer, clinician portal) with PMA filing under FDA 2026 guidance. Needed full SBOM, threat model, and pen test evidence.

    Our Testing
    • Hardware-level analysis of implant and programmer
    • Proprietary RF protocol security review
    • End-to-end threat modeling against eSTAR template
    • Cloud and clinician portal application testing
    FDA Outcome
    • 23 findings across 4 components, all remediated pre-filing
    • SBOM and cybersecurity documentation accepted as filed
    • PMA reviewed without a single cybersecurity deficiency letter
    Real findings

    Vulnerabilities we've caught - before the FDA did

    A sample of the kinds of issues we surface during medical device penetration tests. Devices and identifiers are redacted.

    CriticalWearable cardiac monitor

    Hardcoded credentials in BLE pairing

    Allowed any nearby attacker to pair and exfiltrate ECG telemetry without user consent.

    CriticalClass II infusion pump

    Unauthenticated firmware update endpoint

    Remote attacker on hospital network could push unsigned firmware, altering dosing logic.

    HighContinuous glucose monitor

    Plaintext PHI in mobile companion app cache

    Patient identifiers and readings recoverable from a lost or stolen phone with no jailbreak.

    HighRemote patient monitoring platform

    Predictable session tokens on cloud API

    Session prediction allowed cross-tenant access to clinician dashboards.

    MediumSurgical robotics controller

    Debug interface enabled in production firmware

    JTAG/UART left open allowed local code extraction and reverse engineering.

    MediumConnected diagnostic imaging device

    Outdated TLS configuration on telemetry channel

    TLS 1.0 fallback exposed device-to-cloud channel to downgrade attacks.

    Devices we've helped secure

    Over 200 FDA and global premarket clearances - from startups to global leaders

    Robotic Surgical SystemsIoT-Enabled DiagnosticsImplantable DevicesWearable Health TechComplex IVD SystemsAI-Enabled SaMD
    Cost of an FDA cyber deficiency

    What does a rejection actually cost?

    Plug in your monthly burn, expected launch revenue, and delay window. Most manufacturers see $1M+ exposure on a single cyber hold. Most engagements are a small fraction of that.

    3-9 mo
    Typical hold
    $1M+
    Exposure
    24h
    Quote turnaround
    Run the calculator
    2-minute readiness quiz

    Get a tailored testing recommendation

    Answer a few quick questions about your device classification, connectivity, and FDA path. We'll suggest the right testing track and surface the fastest wins for your submission.

    • Class I, Class II (510(k)/De Novo), or Class III (PMA)
    • Mapped to FDA 2026 premarket guidance
    • Surfaces the 3 fastest wins for your submission
    Take the 2-min quiz
    Offensive security credentials

    The certifications that actually break into devices

    Our team holds the offensive security certifications real attackers respect, backed by hands-on U.S. government red team and military cyber operations experience.

    CISSP
    Certified Information Systems Security Professional
    CSSLP
    Certified Secure Software Lifecycle Professional
    OSWE
    Offensive Security Web Expert
    CRTE
    Certified Red Team Expert
    CRTL
    Certified Red Team Lead
    CARTP
    Certified Azure Red Team Professional
    CBBH
    Certified Bug Bounty Hunter
    U.S. Government Red Team Experience Military Cyber Operations Manual Business Logic Testing
    Industry recognition

    Award-winning. Globally recognized.

    Our work has been honored by the leading voices in medical device cybersecurity.

    2026

    Medical Device Cybersecurity Solution of the Year

    Medical Tech Outlook

    Cover story profiling Blue Goat Cyber as a top industry leader

    2025

    MedTech Service Provider Excellence Award of the Year

    MedTech World Malta 2025

    Sponsored by the Malta Medicines Authority

    2026

    Medical Device Cybersecurity Partner of the Year

    MedTech World North America

    Inaugural North America Awards, in collaboration with CS Lifesciences

    Testing for a hospital, health system or connected health product? See our healthcare penetration testing overview for how scope differs for healthcare organizations and medical device makers. For what the FDA expects around testing, read FDA cybersecurity requirements for medical devices.

    MedTech segments

    Medical Device Penetration Testing for these segments

    See how this service applies to your specific MedTech segment.

    Medical Device Penetration Testing library

    Resources on this topic

    Curated reading for teams working on medical device penetration testing - grouped by format so you can jump to what you need.

    FAQ

    Medical device penetration testing FAQs

    Ready to start Medical Device Penetration Testing?

    Medical Device Penetration Testing - scoped, fixed-fee, FDA-ready.

    Struggling to meet the FDA's cybersecurity testing requirements? We identify vulnerabilities and deliver FDA-ready reports - fast, accurate, and aligned with current guidance. We recommend white-box testing for medical devices, and so does the FDA.