Technical Security
Network security
Perimeter and internal segmentation, reviewed against how traffic actually moves — not just how the diagram says it should.
Who this is for
- Companies running hybrid infrastructure (on-prem plus cloud) with segmentation that's grown ad hoc
- Organizations that need network controls reviewed as part of a broader compliance or audit scope
- Teams unsure whether a compromise of one system could spread further than it should
What this addresses
- Network segmentation exists on paper but hasn't been verified against actual traffic flows
- Remote access and VPN configurations haven't been reviewed since they were first set up
- It's unclear how far an attacker could move laterally after compromising a single system
Our approach
Review starts with understanding actual network topology and traffic flows, not just the intended architecture diagram.
We assess perimeter controls, internal segmentation, and remote access configuration for the gaps that would matter most in a real compromise scenario.
Findings focus on lateral movement risk and exposure, prioritized by what's actually reachable from a realistic starting point.
Every engagement follows the same six-step methodology — see our approach.
What to expect
Scope depends on network complexity and whether the environment is cloud-native, on-prem, or hybrid — hybrid environments generally take longer to map accurately.
Frequently asked
Is this relevant if we're fully cloud-native?
Yes, though the emphasis shifts — cloud-native environments still have network segmentation (VPCs, security groups, subnets) that benefits from the same scrutiny as traditional network security.
How does this relate to penetration testing?
Network security review focuses on configuration and architecture; penetration testing actively attempts to exploit what's found. They're often scoped together for a fuller picture.
Unsure how far a compromise could actually spread?
Tell us about the environment — cloud, on-prem, or both — and we'll scope a review.