Security Assessment Services
Achieving Peace of Mind
Get a clear, defensible view of your security posture across people, process, and technology. Identify gaps, validate controls, and prioritize risk reduction with assessments built for regulated and risk-sensitive organizations. We align risk evaluation with recognized frameworks such as NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 23894 and ISO 27005, ensuring risks are measured in a defensible, industry‑standard way.
Security Maturity Assessments
Know and Grow Your Security Posture
Most organizations can list the security tools they use. Far fewer can clearly explain how well their security program actually works.
Our security maturity assessment evaluates how effectively your security controls are designed, implemented, and governed across your organization. We look beyond isolated technical issues to assess consistency, ownership, and operational effectiveness.
We provide a structured way to track improvement and demonstrate progress to auditors, insurers, and regulators.
By conducting a security maturity assessment you gain a baseline view of current security maturity, visibility into systemic control weaknesses, clear prioritization based on business risk, and a practical roadmap for strengthening security over time.
Security Assessment Components
Each security assessment is scoped based on your environment, regulatory obligations, and business risk profile. Rather than running generic tests, we select assessment components that produce defensible, decision-ready insight for leadership, compliance, and technical teams.
Security Audit Preparation
We assess your readiness for upcoming audits, certifications, or regulatory reviews by evaluating control documentation, evidence, and governance processes. We help teams prepare for audits aligned to ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, NIST, and sector‑specific regulatory requirements. This helps reduce audit friction, identify gaps before they become findings, and ensure security controls can be clearly demonstrated to auditors, regulators, and insurers.
-
Visibility into audit readiness gaps
Clear documentation and evidence expectations
Reduced risk of audit surprises
Stronger alignment between operations and audit requirements
Vulnerability Assessment
We identify technical weaknesses across systems, networks, and applications using structured vulnerability assessment methodologies. Where relevant, our testing incorporates guidance from MITRE ATT&CK, OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG), and recognized exploitation frameworks to reflect modern adversarial behavior. Leadership and technical teams understand and see where exploitable weaknesses exist and how they translate into business and regulatory exposure.
-
A prioritized view of technical vulnerabilities
Context on which findings represent real risk
Reduced noise from low-impact issues
Clear remediation focus for security teams
Penetration Testing
Penetration testing simulates real-world attack techniques to validate whether vulnerabilities can be exploited in practice.
This moves beyond theoretical risk and confirms which control failures create true compromise pathways.
-
Proof of exploitability, not just vulnerability
Validation of security control effectiveness
Real-world attack path visibility
Actionable insight to close high-risk gaps
Social Engineering Testing
We assess human-centric security risk through controlled phishing simulations and social engineering scenarios.
This helps organizations understand how workforce behavior, awareness, and response processes affect security posture.
-
Insight into human-factor risk exposure
Measurement of awareness program effectiveness
Identification of response and escalation gaps
Data to support targeted training and controls
AI Security Assessment
AI systems introduce risks that traditional security assessments do not catch. We evaluate model security, AI data handling, and end‑to‑end AI pipelines using leading standards such as the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, ISO/IEC 42001, OWASP Top 10 for LLMs, and MITRE ATLAS.
Our assessment includes testing for prompt injection, model manipulation, data leakage, insecure plugin or API integrations, and unsafe agent behaviour.
Where appropriate, we incorporate AI red‑teaming techniques to validate real‑world exploitability.
-
Visibility into model, data, and pipeline-level risks
Insight into risks created by AI-enabled SaaS tools and shadow AI usage
Validation of AI system behavior under adversarial and misuse scenarios
A clear roadmap to secure AI adoption across products and operations
Compliance Assessment
We assess security controls against relevant regulatory, privacy, and governance frameworks based on your industry and obligations.
Where applicable, assessments may be mapped to frameworks and regulatory expectations such as ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2, NIST Cybersecurity Framework, CIS Critical Security Controls, healthcare and financial services regulations, and privacy governance standards.
Ensures your security program supports compliance requirements and reduces regulatory and insurer exposure.
-
Clear visibility into compliance-related control gaps
Mapping to applicable regulatory expectations
Stronger audit and regulator defensibility
Reduced risk of non-compliance findings
Cyber Risk Assessment
We evaluate how technical findings translate into business, financial, and operational risk.
This connects security issues to business impact, helping leadership prioritize remediation based on real-world consequences.
-
Business-level risk context for technical findings
Improved executive and board reporting
Better prioritization of remediation investment
Stronger alignment between IT and risk management
How Security Assessments Unfold
Our assessment methodology is designed to be structured, defensible, and aligned with governance and risk management best practices. Each phase is built to produce decision-ready insight, not just technical output.
Stakeholders receive clear, consistent, and actionable findings that support remediation, audit readiness, and executive oversight.
-
We begin by defining scope, objectives, regulatory context, and key risk areas in collaboration with your stakeholders. This ensures the assessment is aligned with business priorities, regulatory and insurer expectations, and leadership goals, with clear success criteria and defined priorities. This approach reduces the risk of misaligned findings and ensures the assessment focuses on what matters most to your organization.
-
We collect and review technical data, policies, procedures, configurations, and operational workflows to understand how security is implemented in practice. This provides a realistic picture of both documented controls and day-to-day operations, highlights documentation and evidence gaps, and reveals where policy and practice diverge. This phase gives clear visibility into how controls actually operate across the organization.
-
We identify control weaknesses, breakdowns, and inconsistencies across technical, administrative, and operational areas. This allows us to distinguish between systemic issues and isolated failures, surface ownership and accountability gaps, and detect emerging risk areas before they become material incidents.
-
We analyze findings against recognized standards, regulatory expectations, and internal governance requirements to assess maturity and risk significance. This enables maturity-based evaluation, risk-based prioritization, and clear alignment with applicable frameworks, providing leadership with a defensible rationale for remediation focus.
-
Results are presented in a clear, executive-ready format designed for leadership, auditors, and risk owners. Reporting includes clear risk narratives, practical remediation guidance, and documentation suitable for audit and insurer use, ensuring findings can be acted on and defended in external and internal discussions.
-
Our deliverables are designed to support leadership oversight, operational remediation, and external scrutiny from auditors, regulators, and insurers. We focus on producing clear, usable outputs that can be referenced, shared, and defended.
This ensures your organization leaves with practical documentation and decision-ready materials that support ongoing risk management.
You receive:
Executive summary for leadership and board reporting
Detailed findings with business and risk context
Security maturity scoring and benchmarking
Prioritized remediation roadmap
Compliance and governance alignment mapping
Evidence-ready documentation for audits and insurers
Security Audit vs Security Assessment
A security audit checks whether required controls exist and meet defined requirements. A security assessment goes further by evaluating how well those controls operate in practice, how consistently they are applied, and how effectively they reduce real-world risk. Understanding the difference helps organizations determine which approach is right for their current risk, compliance, and business objectives.
How We Can Help
Bamboo Data Consulting works with organizations in regulated, data-driven, and risk-sensitive environments to help leadership teams understand, manage, and demonstrate control over digital risk across security, privacy, governance, and emerging technologies. Our approach moves organizations from fragmented technical activity to a clear, defensible, and business-aligned risk posture that stands up to regulator, insurer, and board scrutiny.
If you need a structured, defensible view of your security posture, talk to us about how a Bamboo security assessment can support your risk, compliance, and leadership objectives.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Cybersecurity assessments strengthen defenses by identifying where controls break down in practice, validating whether protections actually work, and prioritizing remediation based on real-world risk. This helps organizations focus on meaningful improvements rather than surface-level fixes that only address compliance on paper.
-
Cybersecurity assessments commonly address risks such as unauthorized access, ransomware exposure, data leakage, phishing and social engineering, third-party vulnerabilities, and control failures that increase regulatory, operational, and insurer-related exposure.
-
Key components typically include governance and policy review, technical testing, vulnerability analysis, business-aligned risk assessment, compliance alignment, and executive-level reporting. Together, these provide a complete view of both technical weaknesses and business impact.
-
Common types include security maturity assessments, vulnerability assessments, penetration testing, social engineering testing, compliance assessments, and business-focused cyber risk assessments. The right mix depends on an organization’s risk profile, regulatory environment, and business objectives.