Security risk assessments, governance frameworks, and board-level reporting aligned to ISM, PSPF, and industry best practice.
Cyber Risk Dashboard
SRAs Completed
3 ASSESSMENTS
Board Report
Q2
Ready for presentation
Executive leadership needs clear cyber risk reporting but your current data doesn't translate to business impact.
ISM, PSPF, Essential Eight, NIST — you're unsure which framework to prioritise and how they interact.
New systems and capabilities are introduced continuously, but security assessment and assurance activities are reactive and difficult to sustain.
Cyber spend is constrained, but there is limited visibility of where investment will have the most impact on risk.
SRAs aligned to your organisation's risk management processes and applicable frameworks, providing a clear view of system risk.
Gap analysis against Information Security Manual controls relevant to your environment, with defined implications for risk and compliance.
Cyber risk reporting that translates technical findings into business impact for executive and committee decision-making.
Prioritised recommendations based on risk, with clear actions, ownership, and sequencing.
Support to prioritise systems, assessments, and uplift activities based on risk and delivery constraints.
Assessment of third-party and supplier risk as part of procurement or onboarding, aligned to your organisation's security requirements and applicable frameworks.
You need ongoing risk management and governance that meets defence industry expectations and supports your security posture.
Your organisation requires ISM and PSPF-aligned risk assessments with governance reporting for executive committees.
You've outgrown ad-hoc security and need a structured approach to risk management, governance, and board reporting.
Federal agency
Evaluated a multi-year Essential Eight uplift program and assessed its sustainability. Delivered a transition-to-business-as-usual plan with defined ownership, cadence, and evidence requirements, enabling compliance to be maintained beyond project delivery.
Federal agency
Developed a risk-based prioritisation framework defining when, where, and why Security Risk Assessments are required, reducing unnecessary assessment effort and enabling focus on higher-risk systems and activities.
Federal department
Delivered an Essential Eight maturity review across a multi-system environment using ACSC verification methodology. Followed with continuous assurance aligned to PSPF reporting and ASD survey cycles, maintaining visibility of control effectiveness between formal assessments.
We align to ISM, PSPF, and your organisation's risk management framework. Where required, we assess against Essential Eight, ISO 27001, and other relevant security standards.
Yes. We support preparation of board and committee papers and can attend to provide input where required. We aim to enable your team to present and own cyber risk discussions.
MSPs typically focus on operating and monitoring technology. We focus on assessing and communicating cyber risk to support decision-making. Our work aligns to Defence and federal expectations, including evidence standards and reporting formats used in reviews and assessments.
Most security risk assessments run 4-8 weeks from kick-off to final report. Timelines scale with the number of systems in scope and whether we also need to build risk register tooling or governance documentation alongside.
Engagements are scoped and priced per project after initial conversation. We'll give you a firm range before you commit so there's no pricing surprise mid-engagement.
We align risk assessments to system authorisation requirements, supporting identification of risks, control gaps, and treatment actions required for accreditation and ongoing assurance.
Yes. We assess third-party and supplier risk as part of procurement or onboarding, aligned to your organisation's security requirements and applicable frameworks.
No. We leverage existing artefacts and reporting where available, focusing on validating controls and translating findings into risk and decision-making outputs.
Yes. We establish risk-based prioritisation criteria to determine when and where assessments are required, helping reduce unnecessary effort and focus on higher-risk systems and activities.