Cloud configuration and permissions described as code — checked before they exist, not after an incident.
A quick manual change is still possible — it just stops being invisible.
This is the starting point in many companies that ship fast and are regulated.
A cloud environment grows faster than anyone documents it. Permissions are granted "for now" and no one takes them away. A resource accidentally exposed to the internet looks identical in the console to every other one.
We define the scope after an assessment — starting with the element that lowers your risk fastest.
A change in the cloud goes through review like code.
We start with a review of identities and permissions — including the service accounts no one usually remembers. We move the environment configuration into code, so every change has an author, a reason and the ability to be rolled back. We wire checks in before a resource launches, so a misconfiguration stops at the proposal stage instead of surfacing in an audit six months later. On top of that we watch for drift from the approved state, because a quick manual change happens in every organization.
Each stage leaves you with a concrete result, not meeting notes.
Who can do what in your environment — including service accounts.
ResultA map of identities and permissions, including forgotten service accounts
Cloud configuration goes through review like any other change.
ResultEnvironment configuration as code: every change has an author and can be rolled back
A misconfiguration stops at the proposal stage, not after deployment.
ResultChecks that stop a bad configuration before launch
Drift from the approved configuration surfaces automatically, not at the next audit.
ResultAn automatic signal when the environment drifts from the approved state
Implementation ends with working configuration and evidence, not a report full of recommendations. Here is an example.
# the bucket cannot go public, even by mistake
resource "aws_s3_bucket_public_access_block" "reports" {
bucket = aws_s3_bucket.reports.id
block_public_acls = true
block_public_policy = true
ignore_public_acls = true
restrict_public_buckets = true
}The setting goes through review and does not disappear with the next change.
| Identity | Has | Decision |
|---|---|---|
service account ci-legacy | administrator | revoke |
role deploy | write in all accounts | narrow to one |
| former employee | active access key | disable |
Permissions stop piling up because someone reviews them regularly.
sg-apiA manual change surfaces the same day, not at the audit.
Illustration. We choose scope and tools after the assessment.
We define the scope after a call and an assessment. Smaller engagements close in a few weeks; larger ones we split into stages, so the result is visible after the first.
Usually not to all of it. In most cases access to the build pipeline configuration and organization settings is enough. We define the scope in writing before we start.
Yes, but not full time. We need contact with someone who knows the system, and a review of our changes. The rest is on us.
We plug into what already works for you. Replacing a tool is the most expensive and least often necessary way to improve security.
No. We work with standards and tools your team knows or will quickly learn — not a proprietary method only we understand. Everything is documented and handed over.
We wire controls so they run in the background. If one starts blocking work, we tune it or move it to a different point in the process.