Cloud Security Posture Assessment
Eight-Domain Cloud Security Evaluation Beyond CSPM Dashboards — IAM, Network, Data Protection, Compute, and Governance
CSPM tools generate dashboards with hundreds of findings, color-coded by severity. What they cannot do is tell you which findings actually matter in your environment, which ones are compensated by other controls, and which represent real attack paths versus theoretical policy violations. The result is dashboard fatigue — a wall of amber and red that teams scroll past because they cannot prioritize.
This assessment combines automated CIS Benchmark scanning with expert manual analysis across eight security domains: IAM, Network, Data Protection, Compute, Logging and Monitoring, Governance, DevSecOps, and Compliance. Every finding is evaluated in context — is this a real risk given your architecture, or a policy violation with no exploitable path? The output is a prioritized findings report that distinguishes between urgent, important, and informational.
Scope covers up to 2 cloud providers, 10 accounts/subscriptions/projects, 2 regions, 1 Kubernetes platform, and alignment to 2 compliance frameworks. This is not a tool output dump — it is expert analysis that tells you what to fix first and why.
Who This Is For
Ideal clients for this engagement.
The Problem
What this engagement addresses.
CSPM Dashboard Fatigue
Hundreds of findings across multiple severity levels with no contextual prioritization. Teams cannot distinguish between a critical IAM misconfiguration that enables account takeover and a low-risk storage bucket policy that is compensated by network controls.
Organic Cloud Growth Without Guardrails
Cloud environments built account-by-account, project-by-project without centralized security architecture. Each team made independent security decisions, resulting in inconsistent IAM models, network architectures, and logging configurations.
Shared Responsibility Confusion
The cloud shared responsibility model is understood conceptually but not operationally. Organizations assume the cloud provider handles security controls that are actually the customer's responsibility — particularly in IAM, network, and data protection.
Multi-Cloud Complexity
Each cloud provider has different security control models, naming conventions, and default configurations. Security teams struggle to maintain expertise and consistent policy across AWS, Azure, and GCP simultaneously.
Assessment Coverage
What we test — systematically.
Identity and access management: role model, permission boundaries, service account governance, federation configuration, MFA enforcement, credential rotation, and least-privilege analysis.
Network architecture: VPC/VNet design, security groups, network ACLs, peering, transit connectivity, DNS configuration, load balancer security, and public exposure analysis.
Encryption at rest and in transit, key management, storage bucket policies, database exposure, data classification, and data loss prevention controls.
Instance security, container and Kubernetes configuration, serverless security, image management, patch management, and workload protection.
CloudTrail/Activity Log/Audit Log configuration, log retention, SIEM integration, alerting coverage, and security event detection capability.
Account structure, organizational policies (SCPs/Azure Policy/Org Policies), tagging strategy, cost management, and resource lifecycle management.
CI/CD pipeline security, infrastructure as code practices, secrets management, container image scanning, and deployment authorization controls.
Alignment to specified compliance frameworks (up to 2), gap analysis, evidence collection readiness, and control mapping.
Deliverables
What you receive.
Cloud Security Findings Report
Prioritized findings across all eight domains with risk ratings, evidence, exploit path analysis where applicable, and specific remediation guidance. Each finding indicates whether it was identified by automated scanning, manual analysis, or both.
Executive Summary
Non-technical summary of overall cloud security posture by domain, top findings with business impact, and strategic recommendations for security and cloud leadership.
CIS Benchmark Compliance Report
Automated CIS Benchmark scanning results for each cloud provider in scope, with pass/fail status per control and remediation guidance for failed controls.
Remediation Roadmap
Prioritized remediation plan sequenced by risk reduction impact and implementation effort. Quick wins, medium-term improvements, and strategic initiatives with dependencies and effort estimates.
Methodology
How the engagement works.
Scoping & Access Provisioning
Week 1
- Scope confirmation: accounts, regions, Kubernetes platforms, compliance frameworks
- Read-only access provisioning across cloud environments
- Architecture documentation review
- Automated CIS Benchmark scanning initiation
Assessment & Analysis
Weeks 1 – 3
- Eight-domain manual assessment with expert analysis
- CIS Benchmark automated scan review and false positive elimination
- IAM deep-dive: permission analysis, service account review, trust relationships
- Network architecture and public exposure analysis
- Compliance framework alignment assessment
Reporting & Debrief
Weeks 3 – 4
- Findings report and executive summary delivery
- CIS Benchmark compliance report delivery
- Live debrief with cloud and security teams
- Remediation roadmap walkthrough and prioritization discussion
Engagement Tiers
Scoped to your architecture.
Focused
Single cloud provider, up to 5 accounts/subscriptions, 1 region, no Kubernetes. Eight-domain assessment with CIS Benchmark scanning and 1 compliance framework.
- Eight-domain assessment (single provider)
- CIS Benchmark scanning
- Findings report and executive summary
- 1 compliance framework alignment
- Remediation roadmap
Standard
Up to 2 cloud providers, 10 accounts/subscriptions, 2 regions, 1 Kubernetes platform, 2 compliance frameworks. Full eight-domain assessment with expert manual analysis.
- Everything in Focused
- Multi-provider coverage (up to 2)
- Kubernetes security assessment (1 platform)
- 2 compliance framework alignment
- Cross-cloud consistency analysis
Complex
2+ cloud providers, 10+ accounts, multiple regions, multiple Kubernetes platforms. Extended depth across all domains with cross-cloud governance review.
- Everything in Standard
- Extended account and region coverage
- Multiple Kubernetes platforms
- Cross-cloud governance and policy consistency
- Detailed compliance evidence gap analysis
Prerequisites
- Read-only access to cloud environments (specific IAM roles/policies provided during scoping)
- Cloud architecture documentation where available
- List of compliance frameworks for alignment assessment
- Kubernetes cluster access (read-only) if Kubernetes is in scope
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions.
How is this different from running a CSPM tool ourselves?
CSPM tools are good at automated policy checks but cannot prioritize findings in context. This assessment combines automated scanning with expert manual analysis. We evaluate whether a finding represents a real attack path or a theoretical policy violation, assess compensating controls, and deliver prioritized guidance — not a raw findings dump. The eight-domain manual assessment covers areas that CSPM tools do not address well, including IAM permission analysis, architecture review, and DevSecOps practices.
Do you need admin access to our cloud environments?
No. Read-only access is sufficient for the assessment. We provide specific IAM role definitions and policies during scoping that grant the minimum permissions needed. No changes are made to your cloud environments during the assessment.
Can this assessment cover both AWS and Azure (or GCP)?
Yes. The Standard tier covers up to 2 cloud providers. The methodology and eight-domain framework are consistent across providers, but the specific controls, configurations, and benchmarks are adapted for each provider's native security model.
Related Offerings
Often paired with this engagement.
Cloud Security Remediation
Closes findings from this assessment — IAM tightening, logging enablement, encryption configuration, and network controls delivered as IaC.
Secure Cloud Landing Zone
If the assessment reveals fundamental architecture gaps, a landing zone design establishes the security foundation for all current and future cloud workloads.
Cloud IAM Architecture
Deep-dive into IAM role model, permission structure, and identity governance if IAM findings require architectural redesign rather than tactical fixes.
Cloud Detection Engineering
Builds cloud-native detection capability for the attack techniques that the assessment identifies as undetected in your current monitoring.
Network Security Assessment
Extends posture evaluation to on-premises network security — segmentation, firewall hygiene, and east-west visibility.
Ready to discuss this engagement?
30-minute discovery call. We will discuss your application architecture, your specific concerns, and whether this assessment is the right fit.