Cloud Security

File server moved to SharePoint? An application somebody lifted into Azure?

Each move brought settings nobody chose. Gartner puts 99% of cloud security failures on the customer's side of the line — almost all of them a default someone accepted years ago.

We fix the settings that matter without breaking what runs, then build the guardrails that stop them coming back — in Azure, AWS, GCP or the SaaS platforms around them.

You get: Roadmap, in priority order

Book your evaluation

Cloud baseline review — extract

Sample

Area	Finding	Priority
Identity and accessHigh	Standing owner assignments on production. No just-in-time elevation.	P1
Vulnerability managementMedium	Managed images two years behind. No patch baseline agreed.	P2
Data protection — residency, encryptionHigh	Storage accounts reachable from any network. Two hold production exports.	P1
Network securityMedium	Flat virtual network. One compromised workload reaches everything.	P2
Workload protectionHigh	Secrets in environment variables, not a vault.	P2
Logging and monitoringMedium	Diagnostic settings absent on most resources. Nothing is queryable.	P2
Incident response and continuityHigh	Backups in the same subscription as what they protect.	P1
Governance and compliance — Loi 25Medium	No policy set assigned. A new subscription starts non-compliant.	P3

What a first pass across a subscription turns up. Ordinary findings, in the order that removes the most risk for the least disruption — not the order a scanner reports them in.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud regulatory compliance dashboard, showing passed controls against the Azure Security Benchmark and the lowest-scoring standards, with compliance controls grouped by domain. — Where the work lands: compliance measured continuously against a named benchmark, so drift shows up as a falling score rather than as a surprise in an audit.Used with permission from Microsoft

Assess

Identity and access
Vulnerability management
Data protection — residency, encryption, key custody
Network security
Workload protection
Logging and monitoring
Incident response — including whether a restore was tested
Governance — Loi 25 and the standards you answer to

How it runs

Discovery workshop
Technical evaluation against established benchmarks
Roadmap, in priority order

Protect

Identity and access — least privilege, just-in-time, conditional access
Vulnerability management — a patch baseline, and images that get rebuilt
Data protection — encryption, key custody, residency
Network security — segmentation built into the topology
Workload protection — hardened baselines as code
Logging and monitoring — alerts that reach a person
Incident response — backups outside the blast radius, restore tested
Governance — policy-as-code for regions and tagging

How it runs

Design, agreed with your team
Build, reviewed like any change
Handover, with runbooks

Maintain

Identity and access — new privileged roles, and access that outlived its reason
Vulnerability management — patch coverage, and what became exposed
Data protection — new public endpoints and what sits behind them
Network security — workloads outside the agreed structure
Workload protection — images drifting off the baseline
Logging and monitoring — whether diagnostics still land anywhere
Incident response — backup success, and whether a restore works
Governance — posture against CIS or ISO 27001

How it runs

Drift surfaced as it happens, not at the audit
New accounts checked on arrival
Revisited when the architecture changes

Customer story

A municipal government

An Azure landing zone with guardrails in place before the first workload arrived — policy-as-code, hub-and-spoke, and just-in-time privileged access

New subscriptions inherit their security controls automatically

Read the story

Drowning in findings, or not sure what your cloud exposes?

Tell us what you run and we will scope the right engagement with you. Or start with the free evaluation — sixty minutes, and a written read on which domains deserve a real look. We reply within one business day.

Book your evaluation See rates