A short time ago, we announced our integration of OWASP ASVS into our cyber risk management platform. At a high level, this allows organizations to run more structured, repeatable security assessments for web applications and cloud‑based services, while also giving security and procurement teams a consistent way to evaluate internally developed and third‑party software.

This article takes a step back.

If you’re a developer or security professional, you’ve likely heard of OWOWASP for years, even if you haven’t followed every update. If you’re newer to application security, you may simply know that “OWASP standards are important,” without fully understanding how they’re used in practice.

We’ll clear that up and, just as importantly, explain how OWASP ASVS is actually applied in modern security programs today.

First developed in 2009, the open‑source OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS) was created to bring consistency to application security requirements.

At the time, web application development was accelerating, but security expectations varied widely between teams, industries, and vendors. ASVS was designed to address that gap with three core objectives:

• Measurement – Provide a clear benchmark for evaluating application security posture.

• Guidance – Define concrete, testable security controls that teams can implement and verify.

• Procurement – Enable organizations to specify security requirements clearly in vendor contracts and assessments.

Over time, ASVS has evolved alongside modern application architectures. It is maintained as an open standard, shaped by a global security community, and is now one of the most widely referenced application security frameworks in the world.

---

ASVS Verification Levels Explained

ASVS is structured around three verification levels, allowing organizations to scale security requirements based on application risk.

ASVS Level 1 (Opportunistic)

Intended for applications with limited exposure and minimal risk. Controls focus on common vulnerabilities and are often validated through basic testing or automated scans.

ASVS Level 2 (Standard)

The recommended baseline for most business applications. In addition to Level 1 controls, Level 2 addresses more advanced attack vectors and is suitable for B2B software and applications handling sensitive data such as credentials or payment information.

ASVS Level 3 (Advanced)

Designed for high‑risk environments, including critical infrastructure and systems with severe impact potential. Verification at this level requires deep technical analysis, detailed threat modeling, and rigorous testing.

---

Choosing the Right ASVS Level

Teams often default to Level 2 across the board “to be safe,” or reserve Level 3 only for regulatory reasons. Both approaches can create problems. Over‑securing low‑risk applications introduces unnecessary friction, while under‑securing critical systems leaves real gaps.

A more effective approach considers:

• the sensitivity of the data being processed

• the business impact of compromise

• exposure to external users or APIs

• regulatory and contractual expectations

---

How ASVS Has Evolved

Although ASVS applies broadly to application security, OWASP has refined its scope over time. Mobile‑specific requirements have been separated into a dedicated standard, allowing ASVS to focus more deeply on web applications, APIs, and backend services.

This shift reflects how modern software is built today: modular, cloud‑native, API‑driven, and closely tied to identity and access management systems.

---

ASVS vs. MASVS

ASVS and the Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS) are often discussed separately, but in real environments they are used together.

• ASVS focuses on web applications, APIs, and server‑side logic.

• MASVS addresses risks unique to mobile platforms, such as local data storage, mobile authentication flows, and device‑level threats.

The challenge for many organizations is maintaining consistency across both standards. Authentication requirements, session management, and data‑protection controls often overlap, yet are assessed independently, leading to duplication or gaps.

More mature programs align ASVS and MASVS requirements under a single application security model, ensuring that web and mobile components are evaluated together rather than treated as isolated projects.

| Area | ASVS (Web & Backend) | MASVS (Mobile Applications) |

|---|---|---|

| Primary focus | Web applications, APIs, backend services | Native iOS and Android applications |

| Typical scope | Server‑side logic and interfaces | Mobile clients and device‑level risks |

| Authentication | Identity flows and backend enforcement | Mobile login flows, token handling, biometrics |

| Authorization | Role and permission enforcement on servers | Client‑side enforcement and backend interaction |

| Data handling | Data processing and storage on servers | Local storage, secure containers, data leakage risks |

| Business logic | Core workflows and backend rules | Mobile interaction with backend logic |

| Platform risks | Injection, access‑control flaws, logic errors | Reverse engineering, tampering, insecure storage |

| How they connect | Defines backend security expectations | Validates how mobile apps consume backend services |

---

What’s New in OWASP ASVS 4.0?

ASVS 4.0 introduced several updates that reflect modern security and regulatory expectations.

Key additions include:

• alignment with NIST 800‑63‑3 digital identity guidelines

• expanded use of Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) for threat mapping

• stronger emphasis on secure DevOps practices

• a more holistic approach to application security

• improved document structure and clarity

• a dedicated focus on privacy controls

• updated password and secrets‑management requirements

• formal inclusion of threat modeling in business‑logic verification

• separation of mobile requirements into MASVS

• expanded treatment of sensitive personal data

These updates move ASVS beyond vulnerability checklists and toward a more comprehensive security verification model.

---

From Point‑in‑Time Testing to Continuous Verification

Historically, ASVS was often applied during penetration tests or pre‑release security reviews. Today, that approach is increasingly insufficient.

Applications change constantly. Code is deployed weekly or daily. Dependencies are updated automatically. In this environment, point‑in‑time verification quickly becomes outdated.

Modern teams use ASVS as a continuous reference throughout the secure development lifecycle, applying it during design reviews, development, testing, and post‑deployment monitoring. Verification becomes an ongoing process rather than a one‑time event, allowing teams to track control coverage, remediation, and risk over time.

---

Does Your Company Need to Be Compliant with OWASP ASVS?

ASVS is not a regulatory mandate. However, it is frequently referenced in:

• customer security questionnaires

• vendor risk assessments

• secure development lifecycle programs

• audit and assurance processes

For many organizations, “ASVS compliance” is less about certification and more about demonstrating credible, structured application security practices that can be explained and defended.

---

ASVS Evidence

A common failure point in ASVS initiatives is evidence.

Security teams may implement the right controls but struggle to demonstrate them. Auditors and customers increasingly expect more than verbal assurances or policy statements. They look for concrete artifacts such as test results, architectural documentation, remediation records, and traceability between controls and outcomes.

Treating evidence as an afterthought often leads to last‑minute scrambles. Treating it as part of the verification process itself leads to smoother audits, faster responses to customer inquiries, and more confidence across teams.

---

Learn More About OWASP ASVS and Centraleyes

Understanding ASVS is one step. Managing it across multiple applications, teams, and evolving environments is another.

Within Centraleyes, ASVS can be selected, structured, and tracked as part of a broader risk and compliance workflow, supporting assessment execution, evidence collection, remediation tracking, and reporting as application environments evolve.

If you’d like to explore how ASVS and MASVS can be managed as part of a scalable application security and GRC program, you can book a demo with one of our specialists.

---

ASVS and MASVS in 2026

As application ecosystems grow more complex, security leaders are placing greater emphasis on APIs, identity flows, mobile backends, and data protection. ASVS and MASVS are increasingly used not only for internal assurance, but also for vendor evaluation, M&A due‑diligence, and customer‑trust programs.

In this context, application security verification is becoming less about passing assessments and more about maintaining continuous, defensible security posture across the software lifecycle.