Security & compliance engineering
The evidence a third-party risk review actually asks for.
The problem
What usually brings people here.
A customer's third-party risk review has arrived as a spreadsheet with two hundred rows, and most of the answers exist only in people's heads. The deal is waiting on it, and the honest answers are worse than they need to be because nothing was recorded as it was built.
What we do
How the work actually runs.
We build the controls and the evidence together: access reviewed and logged, secrets and dependencies scanned in CI with builds failing on high and critical findings, deploys auditable to a person and a commit. Then the questionnaire is answered from artefacts rather than recollection. Where the answer is no, we say no and write the plan.
How this runs
Design, develop, refine.
Design
Two to four weeks. We scope with the engineers who will build it, so the estimate comes from the people held to it.
Develop
Two-week increments, demoed to you, shipped behind flags. You see working software in week three, not a status deck.
Refine
The squad stays. Lead time comes down, the backlog gets shorter, and the same people know why every decision was made.
Proof lives on the work page.
We publish numbers per engagement, cleared by that client, rather than per service line. What is written up there is what we are allowed to show.
Also in Teams & Delivery
Related services.
Start a conversation
Tell us what you are trying to ship.
You will get a reply from an engineer, not a form handler. If we are not the right firm for it, we will say so and tell you who is.