Independent validation of your security controls and evidence to confirm what is working, what has changed, and where risk remains.
Assurance Review
You've achieved a maturity level or certification, but your documentation hasn't been validated in months. You're unsure what's still current and what needs updating.
Changes to your environment, processes, or team knowledge have gone unreviewed. You don't know if your security controls are still effective or if new vulnerabilities have emerged.
An auditor or DISP assessment is months away, but you're not sure whether your controls will pass scrutiny. You lack an independent perspective on what's missing.
Your internal team knows the system but might miss gaps. You need external validation that your controls are truly effective and that you're addressing emerging threats.
Assessment of your security policies, procedures, and controls documentation against current frameworks and best practice.
Independent verification that your security controls are operating as intended and achieving their stated objectives.
Identification of gaps against your applicable frameworks (Essential Eight, DISP, ISM, PSPF) and assessment of remediation priorities.
Clear, board-ready summary of findings, compliance status, and strategic recommendations for board and executive stakeholders.
Prioritised action plan with effort estimates and timelines for addressing identified gaps and maintaining compliance momentum.
Documented evidence supporting control effectiveness suitable for audits, assessments, and compliance reporting activities.
You have implemented controls, but need independent validation that they continue to operate effectively and reflect your current environment.
You have an upcoming audit, assessment, or reporting cycle and need confidence that your controls and evidence will stand up to scrutiny.
Your systems, suppliers, or business processes change regularly, and you need to confirm that security controls remain aligned and effective.
You need to maintain alignment with frameworks such as DISP, Essential Eight, or PSPF on an ongoing basis.
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 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.
Federal agency
Delivered executive and board-ready cyber governance papers, stood up a Foreign Ownership Control and Influence process, and supported system accreditation activities across a shared-services environment — so the agency walked into its next review with defensible answers.
Review cadence depends on your environment, risk profile, and obligations. Many organisations align reviews to reporting cycles (e.g. annually), while higher-risk or fast-changing environments may benefit from more frequent reviews.
A review is an independent validation of control effectiveness and supporting evidence. An audit is a formal assessment conducted for certification or regulatory purposes. A review helps identify gaps and strengthen your position before formal assessment.
Yes. We can support remediation through targeted uplift activities or ongoing advisory. Many organisations use reviews to identify gaps, then address them through structured follow-on work.
We can start with a scoped assessment to understand your current position and determine whether a full review is appropriate, or whether targeted uplift is required first.
Reviews are scoped based on environment complexity. We provide a clear estimate after an initial discussion so you can plan ahead.
MSP reporting typically focuses on operational activity. A security assurance review independently validates control effectiveness and supporting evidence against your required frameworks, providing a clearer view of risk and assurance.
We assess your controls and evidence separately from those responsible for implementing or operating them, providing an objective view of what is working and where gaps remain.