Know where your defenses stand.
A structured evaluation of your security posture against recognized frameworks — giving leadership a clear, evidence-based view of risk and priorities.
- Access control gaps identified in 2 systems
- Logging coverage incomplete on legacy systems
- Patch management largely consistent
- Policy documentation up to date
Assumptions aren't evidence.
Without a structured assessment, security posture is a matter of opinion — not something leadership can act on with confidence.
Unclear Security Posture
Leadership lacks a clear, evidence-based view of where the organization actually stands.
Compliance Pressure
Regulatory and customer requirements demand proof of due diligence, not assumptions.
Outdated Assessments
Previous assessments are generic, out of date, or were never followed up on.
Disconnected Findings
Technical findings aren't connected to business risk or prioritized for action.
Assessments scoped to what you need to know.
From a broad posture review to a focused controls or configuration review.
Security Posture Assessment
An overall evaluation across people, process and technology.
IT General Controls Review
Evaluation of controls governing access, change and operations.
Technical Configuration Review
Review of key system and infrastructure configurations against hardening benchmarks.
Policy & Governance Review
Assessment of security policies, standards and governance structures.
Gap Analysis
A structured comparison of current state against a chosen framework.
Executive & Board Reporting
Findings translated into a report suitable for leadership and the board.
A consistent, evidence-based process.
Every assessment follows the same structured methodology, regardless of framework or scope.
- 01
Scope & Objectives
Engagement scope, objectives and the assessment framework are agreed in writing.
- 02
Evidence Gathering
Documentation, configurations and interviews are collected as evidence.
- 03
Technical & Documentation Review
Evidence is reviewed against the agreed framework and industry practice.
- 04
Gap Analysis
Gaps are identified and rated by risk and business impact.
- 05
Reporting
Findings are compiled into a clear, evidence-based report.
- 06
Debrief & Roadmap
Results are presented alongside a prioritized roadmap for remediation.
Relevant Standards & Frameworks
Assessments are structured around recognized industry frameworks, selected to match your regulatory and business context.
A report leadership can act on.
Findings are delivered in a format built for decision-making, not just documentation.
- Executive Summary ReportA leadership-level summary of posture, risk and priorities.
- Detailed Findings ReportEvidence-based findings mapped to the assessed framework.
- Risk-Rated RecommendationsRecommendations prioritized by risk and effort to address.
- Remediation RoadmapA sequenced plan for addressing findings over time.
- Logging coverage — improved
- Access control gaps — remediation scheduled
- Patch cadence — on track
- Policy documentation — pending review
Why Seraph.
Threat-Informed
Current threat and vulnerability intelligence adds context to assessments and recommendations.
Business-Focused
Technical findings are connected to their potential impact on the organization.
Expert-Led
Engagements are delivered by cybersecurity practitioners with specialist expertise.
Actionable
Every engagement results in clear recommendations, priorities and next steps.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can't find what you need? Ask a security expert.
Ready to know where you stand?
Tell us which framework or regulatory driver matters most to you. Our team will help scope an assessment that fits.