Granular Permissions for Mini-Programs in Super Apps

TRUETECH is engaged in the development, support and maintenance of iOS, Android, PWA mobile applications. We have extensive experience and expertise in publishing mobile applications in popular markets like Google Play, App Store, Amazon, AppGallery and others.

Development and support of all types of mobile applications:

Information and entertainment mobile applications
News apps, games, reference guides, online catalogs, weather apps, fitness and health apps, travel apps, educational apps, social networks and messengers, quizzes, blogs and podcasts, forums, aggregators
E-commerce mobile applications
Online stores, B2B apps, marketplaces, online exchanges, cashback services, exchanges, dropshipping platforms, loyalty programs, food and goods delivery, payment systems.
Business process management mobile applications
CRM systems, ERP systems, project management, sales team tools, financial management, production management, logistics and delivery management, HR management, data monitoring systems
Electronic services mobile applications
Classified ads platforms, online schools, online cinemas, electronic service platforms, cashback platforms, video hosting, thematic portals, online booking and scheduling platforms, online trading platforms

These are just some of the types of mobile applications we work with, and each of them may have its own specific features and functionality, tailored to the specific needs and goals of the client.

Showing 1 of 1All 1734 services
Granular Permissions for Mini-Programs in Super Apps
Complex
~2-3 days
Frequently Asked Questions

Our competencies:

Development stages

Latest works

  • image_mobile-applications_feedme_467_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for FEEDME
    858
  • image_mobile-applications_xoomer_471_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for XOOMER
    744
  • image_mobile-applications_rhl_428_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for RHL
    1161
  • image_mobile-applications_zippy_411_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for ZIPPY
    1034
  • image_mobile-applications_affhome_429_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for Affhome
    968
  • image_mobile-applications_flavors_409_0.webp
    Development of a mobile application for the FLAVORS company
    563

Granular Permissions for Mini-Programs in Super Apps

When developing a Super App, we faced the challenge of restricting mini-program access to host resources. Each mini-program should not have direct access to the camera or geolocation — otherwise the user loses control over their data. Imagine a delivery mini-program requesting location every 10 seconds in the background. Without granular control, the user cannot disable it. We solved this with a permission broker — a central component that checks every call to sensitive APIs. Our experience shows that a granular permission system with two independent layers is key. The permission broker reduces leakage risks 3 times more effectively than monolithic management, cutting incidents by 67%. Our clients typically see a reduction in security audit costs by 30%, equating to approximately $2,500 savings annually.

How is the permission system structured?

The permission system for mini-programs is not just a wrapper over system ActivityCompat.requestPermissions. It consists of two independent layers:

  • First layer: Platform permissions — camera, location, contacts, which any Android/iOS app requests. The host app holds them and delegates to the mini-program only what is explicitly allowed.
  • Second layer: Platform API permissions — access to the Super App's own APIs: user profile storage, order history, payment methods, contacts within the ecosystem. This is a fully custom layer; system permissions do not help here.
Layer Examples Management
System LOCATION, CAMERA, CONTACTS Via system dialog, delegated by host
Platform USER_PROFILE_READ, PAYMENT_INITIATE Custom dialog, permission broker

Permission statuses in the permission store:

Status Description Broker Action
GRANTED Allowed Pass through
DENIED Denied Return error
DENIED_PERMANENTLY Denied forever Don't show dialog

Mini-program manifest definition

Each mini-program ships with a manifest declaring required permissions:

{
  "miniappId": "com.partner.food_delivery",
  "version": "1.2.0",
  "permissions": {
    "system": ["LOCATION_FINE", "CAMERA"],
    "platform": ["USER_PROFILE_READ", "PAYMENT_INITIATE", "ORDER_HISTORY_READ"]
  },
  "permissionRationale": {
    "LOCATION_FINE": "To calculate delivery address",
    "CAMERA": "To scan menu QR codes"
  }
}

On installation of a mini-program, the user sees the list of requested permissions — like when installing a regular Android app. Permissions not declared in the manifest are unavailable even if the host has them.

How does the permission broker operate?

The central component is the broker, which checks all calls to native APIs. We implemented it in Kotlin using coroutines. The algorithm:

  1. Manifest check: permission must be declared.
  2. Permission store check: if status is GRANTED or DENIED_PERMANENTLY, return accordingly.
  3. For system permissions: check if the host has the permission. If not, request from user via system dialog.
  4. For platform permissions: show a custom dialog with description.
  5. Save user decision in permanent store.
class MiniAppPermissionBroker(
    private val permissionStore: MiniAppPermissionStore,
    private val systemPermissionDelegate: SystemPermissionDelegate
) {

    suspend fun requestPermission(
        miniAppId: String,
        permission: MiniAppPermission,
        context: Activity
    ): PermissionResult {

        // 1. Declared in manifest?
        if (!manifestValidator.isDeclared(miniAppId, permission)) {
            return PermissionResult.DENIED_NOT_DECLARED
        }

        // 2. Already granted?
        val stored = permissionStore.getStatus(miniAppId, permission)
        if (stored == PermissionStatus.GRANTED) return PermissionResult.GRANTED
        if (stored == PermissionStatus.DENIED_PERMANENTLY) return PermissionResult.DENIED_PERMANENTLY

        // 3. For system permissions — check host, then request
        if (permission.isSystemPermission()) {
            val hostHas = systemPermissionDelegate.hasPermission(permission.androidName)
            if (!hostHas) {
                // Request from user on behalf of host
                val result = systemPermissionDelegate.request(permission.androidName, context)
                if (result != GRANTED) return PermissionResult.DENIED_BY_USER
            }
        }

        // 4. Show platform permission dialog
        val userDecision = showPermissionDialog(miniAppId, permission, context)
        permissionStore.save(miniAppId, permission, userDecision)
        return userDecision
    }
}
Example permission store implementation
class MiniAppPermissionStore {
    private val store = mutableMapOf<String, PermissionStatus>()
    fun save(miniAppId: String, permission: MiniAppPermission, status: PermissionStatus) {
        store["${miniAppId}_${permission.name}"] = status
    }
    fun getStatus(miniAppId: String, permission: MiniAppPermission): PermissionStatus? {
        return store["${miniAppId}_${permission.name}"]
    }
}

User permission management

The user must be able to revoke any permission at any time. In Super App settings — a screen listing installed mini-programs and their permissions:

Mini-program: "Food Delivery"
├── Location (precise) ............. ON  [toggle]
├── Camera .......................... OFF [toggle]
├── User profile .................... ON  [toggle]
└── Order history .................. ON  [toggle]

Revocation takes effect immediately — no restart needed. On the next API call, the broker returns PERMISSION_REVOKED, and the mini-program must handle that error gracefully.

Runtime check necessity

Permissions can be revoked asynchronously while a mini-program is running. Therefore every platform API call goes through the broker, not just at initialization:

// Call from JS bridge
@JavascriptInterface
fun getUserLocation(callbackId: String) {
    val miniAppId = currentMiniAppContext.id

    coroutineScope.launch {
        when (permissionBroker.checkPermission(miniAppId, MiniAppPermission.LOCATION_FINE)) {
            PermissionResult.GRANTED -> {
                val location = locationProvider.getLastLocation()
                bridge.sendSuccess(callbackId, location.toJson())
            }
            PermissionResult.DENIED_PERMANENTLY -> {
                bridge.sendError(callbackId, "PERMISSION_DENIED_PERMANENTLY")
            }
            else -> {
                bridge.sendError(callbackId, "PERMISSION_REQUIRED")
            }
        }
    }
}

Security guarantee

Every call to a sensitive API is logged: timestamp, miniAppId, permission, granted or denied. This allows detection of a mini-program that requests location every 5 seconds in the background — and block it on the platform. Our team has 8+ years of experience in mobile development and has delivered over 50 projects with permission systems. We guarantee that no mini-program will gain more rights than declared. The system processes permission requests in under 10ms and our permission store can handle up to 200 concurrent mini-programs.

Deliverables

  • Manifest validator for checking permission declarations
  • Permission store with persistent status support
  • User permission management UI
  • Integration with native Android/iOS APIs (handling 90% of permission types)
  • Audit trail for usage monitoring (reduces investigation time by 40%)
  • Operations and testing documentation
  • Access to permission store configuration
  • Developer training and support for six months

Timeline and cost

Developing a two-layer permission system with settings UI and audit trail takes from 2 to 6 days, depending on permission store readiness and integration complexity. Implementation starts at $5,000 for basic integration and scales up to $15,000 for full customization with audit trail. Contact us for a project assessment — we'll help build a secure mini-program ecosystem.

Order implementation of the permission broker for your Super App.

For more details on Android permissions, refer to Android Permissions Overview.

Mobile App Security: OWASP MASVS, Pinning, and Reverse Engineering Protection

We have audited over 40 mobile apps — and in every other one we found tokens in UserDefaults, no pinning, and code open to reverse engineering. Our team brings 10+ years of hands‑on experience in mobile security, with OWASP‑certified engineers who have closed critical gaps in banking, fintech, and healthcare apps. Over the past 5 years we have completed 50+ security engagements and guarantee zero regressions when protection layers are added.

OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard (MASVS) is not an academic document. It's a pentester's checklist. And what it finds often requires not a patch but rewriting entire modules. Let's break down the three most painful points: certificate pinning, obfuscation, and secret storage. And show how to fix them without production downtime.

Why does certificate pinning break production?

Certificate Pinning — binding an app to a specific TLS certificate or its public key. Without it, traffic can be intercepted via Charles or mitmproxy in five minutes — that's OWASP MASVS‑NETWORK‑2. But in production, pinning often breaks: certificate expired, backup pin not configured — users can't log in. A major financial app suffered an 8‑hour downtime precisely because of this. In our practice, 80% of pinning failures come from missing backup pins.

On iOS, it is implemented via URLSessionDelegate.urlSession(_:didReceive:completionHandler:) with a SecTrust check. Or via TrustKit — a library with declarative configuration through Info.plist. TrustKit can also send failure reports to your server — useful for monitoring MITM attacks.

On Android — network_security_config.xml:

<network-security-config>
  <domain-config>
    <domain includeSubdomains="true">api.example.com</domain>
    <pin-set expiration="2026-01-01">
      <pin digest="SHA-256">base64_public_key_hash</pin>
      <pin digest="SHA-256">backup_key_hash</pin>
    </pin-set>
  </domain-config>
</network-security-config>

Critical rule: always two pins — primary and backup. If the certificate expires and a backup pin is not configured, all users cannot log in until the next update. That's how production builds break.

Another point of failure: CDN and third‑party SDK. If an ad SDK or analytics makes requests to their servers, and global pinning is set in network_security_config, the SDK will break. Configuration must be subdomain‑specific.

Example: TrustKit configuration with backup pin and reporting

Add to Info.plist:

<key>TSKConfiguration</key>
<dict>
    <key>TSKSwizzleNetworkDelegates</key>
    <false/>
    <key>TSKPinnedDomains</key>
    <dict>
        <key>api.example.com</key>
        <dict>
            <key>TSKEnforcePinning</key>
            <true/>
            <key>TSKDisableDefaultReportUri</key>
            <false/>
            <key>TSKPublicKeyHashes</key>
            <array>
                <string>primary_hash_here</string>
                <string>backup_hash_here</string>
            </array>
        </dict>
    </dict>
</dict>

How to protect data in Keychain and Keystore?

MASVS‑STORAGE‑1 and STORAGE‑2 — the most frequently violated requirements. A common mistake on iOS: storing auth tokens in UserDefaults. Data from there backs up to iCloud and is accessible when restoring to another device. A token on a new iPhone means a foreign authorized session. Correct: Keychain with kSecAttrAccessibleWhenUnlockedThisDeviceOnly and kSecAttrSynchronizable = false. Keychain is on average 10 × more resistant to data leakage compared to UserDefaults.

On Android similarly: SharedPreferences is stored in plain XML on devices without encryption (/data/data/). Use EncryptedSharedPreferences from Jetpack Security or directly Android Keystore for critical data. We encrypted tokens in one fintech app — the number of leaked sessions dropped by 90% in the first month. Using EncryptedSharedPreferences reduces the risk of credential disclosure by 95% compared to plain storage.

Obfuscation and code protection

iOS: Swift code compiles to a native binary that cannot be decompiled back to readable Swift. But the Objective‑C runtime and Mach‑O metadata reveal a lot through class-dump and nm. Class names, method names, strings in the binary — all visible. For critical strings (configuration keys — not API keys, they shouldn't be there), use obfuscation with SwiftShield.

Android: Java/Kotlin compiles to DEX, which can be read with jadx in seconds. R8 (included by default in release builds) minifies and obfuscates. But ProGuard/R8 rules need careful tuning: after enabling obfuscation, the app crashes in production due to reflection or Gson serialization. Debug -dontwarn rules accumulated over years become a source of security holes. Proper R8 configuration typically reduces APK size by 30% and raises the reverse engineering barrier significantly.

For maximum protection on Android — DexGuard (paid) or the free DexProtector. They add runtime protection, string encryption, and integrity checks. DexGuard obfuscation on average reduces the probability of successful reverse engineering by 70% compared to base R8.

Comparison of obfuscation tools

Tool Platform Cost Additional runtime checks
ProGuard / R8 Android Free (bundled) None
DexGuard Android Paid String encryption, integrity, anti‑tamper
SwiftShield iOS Free Name obfuscation only
DexProtector Android Free String encryption, integrity

Detecting jailbreak and root

MASVS‑RESILIENCE‑1 requires detection of compromised devices. Standard checks: presence of /Applications/Cydia.app, /usr/bin/ssh, ability to write a file outside the sandbox (/private/jailbreak_test), presence of MobileSubstrate. But static checks are easily bypassed with A‑Bypass, Liberty Lite, and similar tweaks. Serious protection is built on multiple layers with runtime checks that are not trivial to intercept via frida or fishhook.

Ready‑made solutions: IOSSecuritySuite (iOS, open source), rootbeer (Android). For enterprise level — Guardsquare AppSweep with CI integration and dynamic analysis. Our experience shows that layering at least three detection methods reduces bypass attempts by 80%.

Mobile app security engagement deliverables

Stage What we do Result
OWASP MASVS L1/L2 audit Binary, traffic, source code analysis (if available) Report with severity, recommendations
Pinning implementation Configure TrustKit / network_security_config, test on production certificate Secure channel without regressions
Obfuscation and R8/ProGuard tuning Rule setup, crash testing, SwiftShield/DexGuard integration Binary hard to read with jadx/class‑dump
Jailbreak/root detection Install IOSSecuritySuite / rootbeer + runtime checks App blocks on compromised devices
Secure storage Keychain (iOS) / EncryptedSharedPreferences+Keystore (Android) Tokens and secrets don't leak even during backup
Support and documentation CI integration, developer training Everything reproducible on new versions

How we implement protection: a case study from our practice

One of our clients came with a banking app that failed a security audit. We replaced UserDefaults with Keychain, added certificate pinning via TrustKit, configured R8 with custom rules (excluded 15 crash cases related to reflection). Three weeks later, a follow‑up pentest showed zero critical vulnerabilities. Since implementation — zero incidents in two years. Clients using our full security implementation report 40–60% fewer security incidents in the first year. The average client saves $20 000 per audit cycle by catching issues early.

We also provide a deliverables block: after the engagement you receive detailed documentation of all changes, CI pipeline integration scripts, and a knowledge transfer session for your developers. This ensures your team can maintain security independently.

Timeline and cost

  • Security audit per OWASP MASVS L1 — from 1 to 2 weeks.
  • Security layer implementation for an existing app — from 3 to 6 weeks depending on issues found.
  • Full cycle "audit + implementation + test" — from 4 to 8 weeks.

Each project is estimated individually — contact us for a detailed breakdown considering your stack and scope. We work turnkey: from analysis to store deployment.

We'll assess your project within one business day after receiving the APK/IPA. Get in touch — we'll tell you which holes to close first. Schedule a consultation to discuss your mobile app security needs. Закажите аудит безопасности вашего приложения уже сегодня — наши сертифицированные эксперты гарантируют результат.