Compliance Readiness & Scanning

Frameworks we work in

Gap assessment

We go control by control and record three things: what the framework requires, what you are actually doing, and how far apart those are. The output is a spreadsheet your team can work through and a written plan that puts the items in order of effort against audit risk, because some gaps take an afternoon and some take a quarter.

We will also tell you where you are over-engineering. Companies routinely build elaborate processes for a control the assessor will satisfy with a policy document and a screenshot, while leaving a genuinely weak control untouched because it was harder.

Scope reduction, before anything else

The cheapest compliance work is the work you delete. Under PCI DSS especially, segmenting cardholder data into a smaller environment removes entire systems from assessment, and the engineering cost of doing that is often less than the ongoing cost of assessing them every year. Same logic applies to CMMC and controlled unclassified information. We look at this first, before writing a single policy.

The evidence, produced by people who do the testing

Nearly every framework eventually asks for scanning and for a penetration test. Buying those from a compliance consultancy that subcontracts them is how you end up with a report that satisfies the auditor and tells you nothing. Ours come from the same people doing the penetration testing and vulnerability assessment work, written to stand up in both conversations: scope, dates, methodology and tester credentials for the assessor, and real findings for your engineers.

An honest note about certificates

A SOC 2 report says an auditor checked that you did what you said you would. It is not a statement that you are secure, and companies with clean reports get breached regularly through something the report never covered. Treat the audit as a floor and a sales requirement. The security work is a separate, longer project that happens to produce most of the evidence along the way.