Legacy & Low-Code Platforms
Some products sit on top of legacy or low-code platforms that make automation harder than expected. This page explains how we assess whether critical workflows on these platforms can be protected reliably, and where different types of signal make sense.
When the problem is the platform
Your product might sit on top of tools like Oracle, Salesforce, or low-code builders that generate awkward HTML, heavy use of iframes, or highly dynamic elements that are difficult to target reliably. We are not going to tell you to rip out a core system just to make automation possible.
Instead, we look at where full browser automation would be fragile or uneconomic, where API or lower-level checks provide a clearer signal, and where a small, targeted change with your web team or delivery partner could unlock reliable protection.
What we look at
- The workflow that carries the most business risk
- How the DOM is generated and how stable it is between releases
- Dynamic behaviour, popups and modals that affect testability
- Places where API checks or lower-level tests would give better value
- Small front-end changes that could make automation practical and economically worthwhile
How this fits into the overall approach
The starting point is always the same: identify the workflow that carries the most business risk and decide what kind of signal would actually provide confidence.
On some platforms, that signal can be provided reliably through browser automation. On others, API-level checks or a small, targeted change provide a clearer and more economical answer.
Where the platform itself limits testability, the constraint is made explicit rather than worked around quietly.