One Firm, Two Fixed-Timeline Delivery Tracks

We do not guess. We diagnose. Every engagement runs to a fixed scope, a fixed fee and a fixed date — whether the question is where quantum-vulnerable cryptography lives in your .NET estate, or where your data is flowing into public LLMs.

One discipline runs through both practice lines: map reality first, quantify the exposure second, engineer the fix third, and deliver it directly to technical leadership. No open-ended retainers, no hourly blocks — a fixed-timeline intervention with a signed outcome.

Track 01 · Post-Quantum Cryptography Delivery

For .NET and Azure estates, PQC migration starts with a map the free scanners cannot draw.

The open-source CBOM scanners read Java, Python, Go and npm — not C#. So the first step of any post-quantum engagement is building the Cryptographic Bill of Materials those tools cannot: a Roslyn-based semantic read of your actual code, run against your own infrastructure.

The four steps below are the Cryptographic Baseline Audit, run across your full estate over four weeks. Cryptographic Discovery is the same discipline at a smaller scope — steps 01 and 02 against a single application, in three days, ending in a prioritised 90-day roadmap rather than an estate-wide architecture. Both are on the Post-Quantum page.

Step 01 · Cryptographic Baseline Audit — Cryptographic Discovery

We map your actual cryptographic reality.

  • CBOM Generation: Roslyn-based semantic analysis of your C# — active source, NuGet dependencies, and legacy binaries — into a Cryptographic Bill of Materials.
  • Third-Party Coverage: BouncyCastle, NSec and the rest of the footprint the free scanners miss because they never parse .NET at all.
  • Runs on Your Infrastructure: nothing is uploaded, nothing phones home — your CBOM never leaves your environment.
Step 02 · Cryptographic Baseline Audit — Risk & Exposure Profiling

We separate the harvest-now vulnerabilities from the noise.

  • Harvest-Now-Decrypt-Later Exposure Read: cross-referencing your CBOM against data retention lifespans and compliance mandates.
  • Prioritized Risk Matrix: separating critical retroactive exposure from low-priority internal systems, so your first sprint attacks what actually matters.
Step 03 · Cryptographic Baseline Audit — Architecture & Strategy

We design the migration before anyone touches a line of code.

  • Crypto-Agility Wrappers: decoupled architectural layers that let you swap legacy RSA/ECC for NIST-standardized ML-KEM and ML-DSA without breaking downstream systems.
  • Hybrid-Transition Isolation: knowing exactly what breaks when native .NET PQC support meets legacy frameworks, and how to isolate it.
Step 04 · Cryptographic Baseline Audit — Implementation Governance

We deliver an executable, multi-year blueprint — and stay for the decisions.

  • The Migration Blueprint: the step-by-step engineering plan for the transition, without a flag day.
  • Board & Architecture Governance: advising your architecture review boards and principal engineers as the transition runs.
A smaller scope — the three-day Cryptographic Discovery

The four steps above run the Cryptographic Baseline Audit across your full estate. Where you need a first read on a single application first, Cryptographic Discovery runs the same steps 01 and 02 against one application in three days, ending in a prioritised 90-day roadmap rather than an estate-wide architecture. It is scoped as a fixed-fee engagement on the Post-Quantum page.

Track 02 · AI Security & Data Sovereignty

A ruthless, four-step examination of where your data is actually flowing.

Generative AI adoption has outpaced traditional security controls. To regain data sovereignty, enterprise leadership cannot rely on automated vulnerability scanners. It requires deep architectural mapping. The four steps below are the AI Sovereignty Diagnostic, run over two weeks to map your shadow AI footprint, quantify your IP leakage, and engineer a Zero-Knowledge local AI infrastructure.

Diagnosis is not assurance. Where you need proof of what your systems can be made to do, the AI Security Baseline Audit runs a different sequence — described after step 04 below.

Step 01 · AI Sovereignty Diagnostic — Shadow AI Mapping (Days 1–5)

We begin by bypassing the assumptions of your Acceptable Use Policies to uncover where your data is actually flowing.

  • API Sprawl Identification: Auditing unauthorized or orphaned API keys connecting internal systems to public LLMs (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.).
  • Endpoint & Extension Mapping: Identifying unsanctioned browser extensions and local AI wrappers deployed by individual developers.
  • RAG Pipeline Assessment: Evaluating existing Retrieval-Augmented Generation flows for excessive permission scopes and internal data oversharing.
Step 02 · AI Sovereignty Diagnostic — Vulnerability & Compliance (Days 6–10)

Once the data flows are mapped, we quantify the business and regulatory risk.

  • Prompt-Layer Exfiltration Analysis: Determining if proprietary code, PII, or financial data is being transmitted in plaintext without tokenization.
  • Regulatory Gap Assessment: Mapping active data flows against the strict requirements of GDPR Article 28, the EU AI Act (August 2026 deadline), and HIPAA BAA requirements.
  • OWASP LLM Evaluation: Testing your current deployments against the OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Models, specifically targeting Sensitive Information Disclosure.
Step 03 · AI Sovereignty Diagnostic — Zero-Knowledge Architecture (Days 11–13)

Diagnosis without a cure is useless. We engineer the specific architectural interventions required to stop the leakage without destroying your team's productivity.

  • Local LLM Orchestration Design: Mapping the transition from public APIs to sovereign, on-premises or private-cloud AI models.
  • Smart Redaction Architecture: Designing real-time prompt tokenization and automasking layers that sit between the browser and the model.
  • Immutable Audit Logging: Structuring prompt-level logging requirements to satisfy regulatory evidence requests.
Step 04 · AI Sovereignty Diagnostic — Executive Delivery (Day 14)

We bypass middle management and deliver the unvarnished truth directly to technical leadership.

  • The Threat Matrix Report: A brutal, clear-eyed presentation of your current vulnerabilities.
  • The Engineering Roadmap: The step-by-step architectural blueprint to transition your enterprise to a Zero-Knowledge AI posture.
Where assurance replaces diagnosis — the AI Security Baseline Audit

The four steps above diagnose where your data is flowing. The AI Security Baseline Audit proves what your systems can be made to do, and runs a different sequence: a scoping call that establishes what the system can access, call and trigger — then a signed authorization-to-test, hands-on adversarial red-teaming of the live deployment, control testing evidenced against NIST AI RMF, the EU AI Act and ISO 42001, a full risk register ranked by reach rather than a generic template, and a remediation roadmap with 90 days of advisory access. It is scoped in two fixed-fee tiers according to what the system can reach and act on.

Strict Secure Delivery Protocol

Because Threat Matrix Reports and Cryptographic Bills of Materials (CBOM) contain highly sensitive supply-chain vulnerabilities, we do not transmit deliverables via standard email or commercial cloud drives. All architectural blueprints and compliance audits are delivered exclusively through NestVault365—our proprietary, Zero-Knowledge, End-to-End Encrypted (E2EE) enterprise data room. Your vulnerability data is encrypted client-side; even our own infrastructure cannot read your plaintext reports.

Scope a discovery engagement for your estate

A strict 15-minute qualification call. We will tell you honestly which track — if either — is the right fit for the question you are asking.

Request a Briefing