Case studies

Case Study: Authentication System Architecture Transformation

How an architecture audit helped a startup optimize their authentication system and prepare for global scale

Client Profile

A rapidly growing B2C startup experiencing unexpected user growth in the Asia-Pacific region. Their mobile application served over 100,000 daily active users, with authentication being a critical component of their service.

View Detailed Case Study

Challenge

The client was experiencing increasing authentication latency and rising infrastructure costs as their user base grew. Initial assumptions about usage patterns and growth trajectories were proving incorrect, leading to system strain and potential scalability issues.

Key Metrics Before Optimization:

  • Average authentication latency: 800ms
  • Infrastructure costs: Growing by 40% month-over-month
  • Peak load handling: System strain during APAC business hours
  • User session management: Single-region deployment

Our Approach

We began with a comprehensive architecture audit, focusing on:

  1. Current system architecture documentation and analysis
  2. Performance metrics collection and evaluation
  3. Usage pattern analysis
  4. Infrastructure cost assessment
  5. Scalability bottleneck identification

Key Findings

Architecture Assumptions vs. Reality:

  • Session Duration:
    • Assumption: < 1 hour sessions
    • Reality: 80% of users maintained 8+ hour sessions
  • Traffic Patterns:
    • Assumption: Uniform distribution
    • Reality: 5x spikes during 6-9 AM GMT+8
  • Growth Pattern:
    • Assumption: Linear growth in primary region
    • Reality: 3x faster growth with multi-region concentration

Technical Issues Identified:

  • Single Redis instance for session management
  • Redundant database calls (3 per authentication request)
  • No read replicas for authentication data
  • Unnecessary user profile fetching on every request

Solution Implemented

Technical Solutions:

  • Implemented Redis Cluster for distributed session management
  • Developed write-through caching for user profiles
  • Separated authentication and profile data flows
  • Added read replicas in the APAC region

Results

Performance Improvements:

  • Authentication latency reduced from 800ms to 95ms average
  • Infrastructure costs reduced by 28%
  • Improved system stability during peak hours
  • Enhanced user experience in the APAC region

Key Takeaways

  • Architecture audits are crucial for identifying hidden assumptions
  • Real-world usage patterns often differ from initial assumptions
  • Early optimization based on actual data prevents costly rewrites
  • Regional considerations are crucial for global applications

Need Help with Your Architecture?

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss how we can help optimize your startup’s architecture through our proven audit process.

Case Study: From Customer Reports to Proactive Monitoring

How architecture audit transformed a startup’s monitoring capabilities and reduced customer churn

Client Profile

A fast-growing B2B SaaS startup with a rapidly expanding user base experiencing critical issues with system visibility and customer satisfaction. The platform was serving 45,000 daily active users but facing significant customer retention challenges due to undetected system issues.

View Detailed Case Study

Initial State Assessment

Critical Business Metrics:

  • DAU dropped from 45K to 28K over 3 months
  • Customer churn increased by 185%
  • No incident tracking system in place
  • Zero proactive issue detection
  • 100% of incidents were first reported by customers

Architecture Audit Findings

Monitoring and Observability Gaps:

  • No centralized logging system
  • Basic server monitoring only (CPU, RAM, disk)
  • No application-level metrics collection
  • Fragmented error handling across microservices
  • Missing correlation between system metrics and business KPIs
  • No incident response procedures or documentation

Process Gaps:

  • No defined incident severity levels
  • Absence of on-call rotation
  • No standardized incident response workflow
  • Missing technical debt tracking system
  • No post-incident analysis process

Recommended Solutions

Monitoring and Observability Stack:

Log Management and Analysis

ELK Stack (Elasticsearch, Logstash, Kibana)

  • Centralized log collection and analysis
  • Real-time log streaming
  • Custom dashboards for different service areas
Metrics and Alerting

Prometheus + Grafana

  • System and application metrics collection
  • Custom alerting rules
  • Visual metrics dashboards
Distributed Tracing

Jaeger

  • End-to-end transaction tracking
  • Performance bottleneck identification
  • Service dependency mapping
User Analytics

Plausible

  • Privacy-focused analytics
  • User behavior tracking
  • Custom event monitoring
Anomaly Detection

Amazon CloudWatch

  • ML-based anomaly detection
  • Custom metric patterns
  • Automated alerting

Incident Management Framework:

Incident Tracking and Management

Jira Service Management

  • Incident ticket management
  • SLA tracking
  • Custom workflows

Alternative Recommendation: Opsgenie for enhanced alerting and on-call management

Documentation and Collaboration

Linear + Confluence

  • Incident playbooks
  • Post-mortem templates
  • Technical documentation
Technical Debt Management

SonarQube + Stepsize

  • Code quality metrics
  • Technical debt quantification
  • IDE integration for debt tracking

Implementation Results

Business Impact After 3 Months:

  • DAU stabilized and grew to 52K
  • Customer churn returned to normal levels
  • 89% of issues detected before customer impact
  • Established baseline detection time: 2.1 minutes
  • New incident resolution SLA: 30 minutes for critical issues
  • Full visibility into incident frequency and patterns

Technical Achievements:

  • Complete observability across all critical services
  • Automated anomaly detection with clear alerting thresholds
  • Standardized incident response procedures
  • Quantifiable technical debt metrics
  • Clear prioritization framework for system improvements

Key Takeaways

Critical Success Factors:

  • Starting with a comprehensive architecture audit revealed the true scope of monitoring gaps
  • Implementing tools in phases allowed for proper team adaptation and training
  • Establishing clear metrics before and after changes demonstrated ROI
  • Combining technical monitoring with business KPIs provided fuller picture
  • Regular review and adjustment of alerting thresholds prevented alert fatigue

Best Practices Established:

  • Regular review of monitoring coverage and alerting thresholds
  • Monthly technical debt assessment and prioritization
  • Quarterly review of incident response procedures
  • Continuous improvement of playbooks based on actual incidents
  • Clear correlation between technical metrics and business impact

Get Started

Ready to Transform Your Monitoring Capabilities?

Our team specializes in helping startups build robust monitoring and incident management systems. We can help you:

  • Conduct a thorough architecture audit
  • Develop a tailored monitoring strategy
  • Select and implement the right tools for your scale
  • Establish effective incident response procedures

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss your specific needs.

Case Study: Breaking Through Performance Bottlenecks

How Architecture Audit Revealed Hidden Database Integration Issues

Client Profile

A rapidly growing fintech startup reached out for an architecture audit when their system, processing 15+ RPS (requests per second), began experiencing regular payment delays and transaction timeouts during peak hours. The audit revealed their payment processing system, built during the early startup phase with direct MongoDB database integrations, was completely freezing during high-load periods – a common symptom of early technical decisions made to accelerate feature delivery.

View Detailed Case Study

Critical Symptoms

Initial Warning Signs:

  • Processing slowing down to 5+ seconds during peak hours
  • Random transaction timeouts when processing volume increased
  • Customer complaints about double charges due to retry attempts
  • Support team overwhelmed with failure tickets
  • Engineers spending nights monitoring database performance

Initial State Assessment

Performance Metrics:

  • Database CPU consistently hitting 100% during peak hours (9-11 AM, 2-4 PM)
  • Average transaction processing time: 2.3 seconds (up to 8 seconds during peaks)
  • System struggling at 15 RPS, completely freezing at 20 RPS
  • 30% of transactions timing out during peak load
  • Request queues growing exponentially during peak hours

Architecture Audit Findings

Technical Debt Issues:

  • Multiple services directly querying MongoDB
  • No connection pooling or query optimization
  • Duplicated database queries across different services
  • Each service implementing its own data validation
  • No circuit breakers or fallback mechanisms
  • Transaction rollbacks causing cascade failures

Business Impact:

  • Lost transactions during peak hours
  • Growing customer churn due to service unreliability
  • Inability to onboard new large clients
  • Rising operational costs from support overhead
  • Engineering team stuck in firefighting mode
  • Compliance risks from inconsistent data access

Recommended Solution: API-First Approach

Key Components:

  • Dedicated API Gateway with rate limiting and load balancing
  • Centralized Data Access Layer
  • Service-specific APIs with clear contracts
  • Consistent validation and error handling
  • API versioning support
  • Caching layer implementation
  • Connection pooling and query optimization

Implementation Results

Performance Improvements:

  • Average processing time reduced to 300ms
  • System now handles 50+ RPS consistently
  • Database CPU utilization below 60% at peak
  • Zero timeouts during normal operations
  • Successful handling of 3x traffic spikes

Development Impact:

  • 75% reduction in new feature deployment time
  • 90% decrease in integration-related bugs
  • API reusability saving 120+ developer hours monthly
  • Simplified compliance audits due to centralized access control
  • Reduced on-call incidents by 85%

Key Takeaways

Universal Patterns Across Products:

  • Database integration bottlenecks are common across all types of products, not just fintech
  • Quick technical decisions during startup phase often become critical bottlenecks
  • API-first approach enables scalable and maintainable integrations for any product type
  • Clear API contracts accelerate feature development regardless of industry
  • Early technical debt identification prevents scaling issues

Why This Matters for Any Product:

  • Direct database integration is a common pattern that seems faster initially
  • As product usage grows, database bottlenecks become universal blocking issues
  • API-first approach provides consistent performance regardless of load
  • Proper service isolation enables independent scaling of components
  • Engineering teams can focus on features instead of firefighting

Ready to Optimize Your System’s Performance?

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss how we can help identify and eliminate your performance bottlenecks through our proven architecture audit process.

Security-First Architecture for Web3 Gaming

How Architecture Audit Transformed a Gaming Platform’s Performance and Security

Client Profile

A Web2-Web3 gaming platform requested an architecture audit focusing on two critical concerns: system productivity and blockchain security. Their platform was handling NFT minting and trading while supporting traditional gaming features, with direct database queries for every operation.

View Detailed Case Study

Critical Symptoms

  • High latency in game actions (2-3 seconds per request)
  • Token minting delays during peak hours
  • Security concerns with key management
  • Growing infrastructure costs
  • Limited scalability due to direct DB queries
  • Missing API contracts between services

Initial State Assessment

Performance Metrics:

  • Average response time: 2.8 seconds
  • Database CPU utilization: 95% during peak hours
  • Duplicate queries for same data: 60% of total queries
  • Token minting time: 15-20 seconds

Players had to interact with a simple arcade mini-game while waiting for their NFT, an entertainment attempt to mask the long minting process

Recommended Solutions

Performance Optimization:

  • Redis implementation for frequent queries
    • Reduced duplicate queries by 85%
    • Cache hit ratio: 95%
    • Response time improved to 200ms
    • Eliminated need for “waiting” entertainment features

CQRS Pattern Implementation:

  • Separated read and write models
  • Optimized read operations for game state
  • Dedicated blockchain operations handling

API-First Approach:

  • Clear contracts between services
  • Standardized error handling
  • Request rate limiting
  • Transaction status tracking

Security Enhancement:

  • Adopted secure key management with HSM
    • Signing-only capability with no key export
    • Complete audit logging
  • Rate limiting implemented across all endpoints
  • Separate environments for different security levels
  • Comprehensive audit logging

Implementation Results

Performance Improvements:

  • Response time reduced to 200ms (93% improvement)
  • Token minting time reduced to 5 seconds
    • Eliminated need for entertainment mini-game
    • Direct-to-blockchain, efficient minting process
    • Clear progress indicators for users
  • Database load reduced by 70%
  • Cache hit ratio maintained at 95%

Security Enhancements:

  • Secure key operations
  • Complete audit trail of all operations
  • Segregated environments for different security levels
  • Automated security scanning
  • Platform-wide rate limiting protection

Business Impact:

  • Improved user satisfaction from faster minting
  • Reduced development overhead
  • Lower infrastructure costs
  • Enhanced platform security reputation
  • Increased user trust in minting process

Key Takeaways

  • Redis caching significantly improves gaming platform performance
  • CQRS pattern provides clear separation for blockchain operations
  • Secure key management is fundamental for Web3 gaming
  • API-first approach with rate limiting ensures platform stability
  • Performance issues should be solved directly rather than masked
  • Clear separation of concerns enhances both security and performance

Ready to Optimize Your Web3 Products?

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss how we can help optimize your Web3 products through our proven architecture audit process. Whether you’re building DeFi, GameFi, or other Web3 applications, our expertise in both traditional and blockchain architecture will help ensure your platform’s security and performance.

Case Study: Taming Microservices Chaos

How Architecture Audit Revealed Over-Engineering in a Security Product

Client Profile

A security-focused fintech startup reached out for a code and architecture audit of their product. The system, handling sensitive financial data, was built using an overzealous microservices approach – breaching both the “Keep It Simple” (KISS) and “Single Responsibility” principles. Instead of having clear service boundaries with focused responsibilities, they created a tangled web of overlapping microservices, each handling multiple concerns and duplicating functionality.

View Detailed Case Study

Critical Symptoms

Initial Warning Signs:

  • Frequent service deployments causing system-wide instability
  • Complex inter-service communications leading to cascading failures
  • High infrastructure costs due to redundant services
  • Development team spending more time on service maintenance than feature development
  • Increasing difficulty in tracing transaction flows

Initial State Assessment

Architectural Issues:

  • 12 microservices performing work that could be handled by 2-3 services
  • Services with overlapping responsibilities, violating Single Responsibility Principle
  • Direct database access across services creating tight coupling
  • No service boundaries based on business domains
  • Over-complicated deployment pipeline managing multiple services
  • Missing API documentation and contracts
  • Improper error handling causing complete service restarts

Technical Impact:

  • Average deployment time: 45 minutes due to complex dependencies
  • Service restart frequency: 5-7 times daily
  • Development velocity decreased by 60% over 6 months
  • 40% of engineer time spent on deployment and maintenance
  • Multiple points of failure in inter-service communication

Business Impact:

  • Delayed feature delivery
  • Increased operational costs
  • Reliability issues affecting customer trust
  • Difficulty in onboarding new developers
  • Complex monitoring and debugging processes

Recommended Solution

Architecture Simplification:

  • Consolidation into 3 core services based on business domains
  • Implementation of proper service boundaries with clear responsibilities
  • Centralized data access layer
  • API-first approach with comprehensive documentation
  • Robust error handling with retry mechanisms

Best Practices Implementation:

  • Clear API contracts and documentation
  • Circuit breaker patterns for resilience
  • Proper error handling with graceful degradation
  • Standardized deployment procedures
  • Monitoring and observability improvements

Implementation Results

Technical Improvements:

  • Deployment time reduced to 8 minutes
  • Service reliability increased to 99.995%
  • Development velocity increased by 85%
  • System complexity reduced by 70%
  • Clear service boundaries established

Business Impact:

  • 65% reduction in infrastructure costs
  • 40% faster feature delivery
  • Simplified onboarding process
  • Reduced maintenance overhead
  • Improved system reliability

Key Takeaways

Universal Patterns:

  • Microservices aren’t always the answer – start simple and evolve as needed
  • Follow “Single Responsibility” and “Keep It Simple” principles from the start
  • Proper service boundaries should align with business domains
  • Investment in proper error handling pays off in reliability
  • Documentation and API contracts are not optional extras

Ready to Optimize Your Microservices Architecture?

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss how we can help optimize your microservices architecture through our proven audit process.

Securing Multi-Product Access Through SSO

How Architecture Audit Revealed Critical Security and Authentication Vulnerabilities

Client Profile

A growing tech company with multiple B2B products approached us for an architecture audit when integrating their latest acquisition became problematic. Each product had its own authentication system, creating significant security vulnerabilities and compliance risks. Their customer base included enterprise clients accessing multiple products, each with different security requirements and compliance needs.

View Detailed Case Study

Security Vulnerabilities Identified

Critical Security Risks:

  • Different password policies across products
  • Inconsistent security monitoring
  • No unified audit trail of access attempts
  • Potential for unauthorized cross-product access
  • Varied session management implementations
  • Incomplete access revocation across products

Initial State Assessment

Authentication Landscape:

  • 5 separate authentication systems
  • 40% of users accessing multiple products
  • Average 12 password reset tickets daily
  • 15 minutes average time for access provisioning
  • Security policies varied across products

Security Impact:

  • No centralized security incident monitoring
  • Delayed threat detection across systems
  • Complex compliance reporting requirements
  • Incomplete user access tracking
  • Inconsistent security update implementation

Business Impact:

  • Customer dissatisfaction with multiple logins
  • Enterprise deals delayed due to security concerns
  • 30% of support tickets related to authentication
  • Integration projects taking 2-3 months per product

Recommended Solution: Enterprise SSO Implementation

Security Architecture:

  • Centralized identity provider with enterprise-grade security
  • SAML 2.0 integration for secure enterprise access
  • Multi-factor authentication enforcement
  • Unified security policies across all products
  • Real-time security monitoring and alerting
  • Comprehensive audit logging

Access Management:

  • Single sign-on across all products
  • Role-based access control (RBAC)
  • Automated user provisioning and deprovisioning
  • Centralized access policy management
  • Emergency access protocols

Implementation Results

Security Improvements:

  • 100% visibility into authentication attempts
  • Unified security monitoring across all products
  • Instant access revocation capability
  • Complete audit trail of all access events
  • Standardized security controls

Operational Improvements:

  • Access provisioning reduced to 2 minutes
  • Password reset tickets reduced by 85%
  • Integration time for new products: 2 weeks
  • Single security policy enforcement point
  • Automated compliance reporting

Business Impact:

  • Enhanced enterprise security posture
  • Accelerated security compliance certifications
  • Reduced security administration overhead
  • Improved customer satisfaction with unified access
  • Faster enterprise sales cycle completion

Key Takeaways

  • Security architecture requires holistic assessment
  • Early SSO adoption prevents security fragmentation
  • Unified identity management is crucial for enterprise security
  • Architecture audit reveals hidden security vulnerabilities
  • Centralized authentication enhances security control

Ready to Secure Your Multi-Product Environment?

Contact us at [email protected] to discuss how our architecture audit can help identify and address your authentication and security challenges. Our expertise in enterprise security architecture will help ensure your platform’s compliance and scalability.

Scroll to Top