Why Traditional Security Testing Fails for Medical Devices
You need comprehensive security testing before FDA submission. But traditional penetration testing firms approach your BCI like it's a web application.
They run automated scanners designed for IT systems, testing for vulnerabilities that don't exist in medical devices. When you explain your device architecture using terms like "local field potentials" or "spike sorting," you watch their eyes glaze over.
They miss the attack vectors unique to medical devices:
-
Manipulation of neural signal processing algorithms that could alter decoded intent
-
Unauthorized access to raw brain data streams containing the most intimate information humans have
-
Interference with real-time adaptive control systems that could cause device malfunction
-
Exploitation of wireless telemetry in implantable devices with severe power and size constraints
-
Attacks targeting the security handoff between manufacturer and healthcare provider
-
Compromise of firmware update mechanisms for implanted BCIs
The result: Security assessments that miss critical BCI-specific vulnerabilities. Test reports filled with generic findings that don't address real neural interface risks. Wasted time and money on irrelevant testing. False confidence that leaves genuine security gaps unaddressed. FDA reviewers who aren't convinced by superficial security testing.
You don't need checkbox compliance. You need security testing that actually protects patients.
You need experts who understand both neuroscience and cybersecurity.

We Understand Your Challenge
We've seen what happens when generic security firms try to assess BCIs. We understand the pressure of FDA timelines, investor expectations, and the responsibility of building technology that directly interfaces with the human nervous system.
That's why we specialize in medical device and BCI security
Our Expertise
✓ FDA Cybersecurity Leadership - Leading FDA cybersecurity work for the implantable BCI community
✓ Published BCI Security Research - Peer-reviewed publications on neural interface vulnerabilities
✓ IEEE/IEC Standards Contributions - Helping create the standards others will follow
✓ Deep Neuroscience Understanding - We speak both neural engineering and cybersecurity
✓ FDA Approval Track Record - Companies we've supported achieved approval with zero cybersecurity findings
We test brain-computer interfaces and medical devices, not web applications.
When You Need Security Testing
Multiple Times Throughout Your Device Lifecycle
Security testing isn't a one-time event. It's an ongoing process throughout development and deployment.
Our Security Testing Services
Comprehensive Testing for Medical Devices and BCIs
We offer a complete range of security assessment services, each adapted for the unique challenges of medical devices and neurotechnology.
Penetration Testing
Comprehensive security testing of your medical device. We actively test all attack surfaces to identify how an adversary could compromise your device.
What We Test:
-
Firmware & Embedded Systems
-
Network & Communication Security
-
Wireless Security
-
Application Security
-
Authentication & Authorization
-
Data Protection
-
Update Mechanisms
The Nave Security Difference:
✓ Medical Device-Specific Attack Vectors - We test for neural signal manipulation, brain data exposure, and adaptive algorithm poisoning
✓ Medical Device Constraints - We account for power budgets, real-time requirements, biocompatibility, and patient safety
✓ FDA Compliance - Our testing documentation supports FDA cybersecurity requirements
✓ Patient Safety Focus - We assess risks based on potential patient harm, not just data breach likelihood

What Happens Without Proper Security Testing
Every undiscovered vulnerabilities puts your organization at risk:
1
FDA Delays & Additional Costs
6-12 month delays from inadequate security documentation. Emergency testing at premium rates. $2-5M in additional burn you didn't plan for.
2
Patient Safety Risks
Undiscovered vulnerabilities in neural signal processing, brain data exposure, or firmware compromise. Post-market recalls and lawsuits.
3






