Start with the decision
Know which controls are supported by evidence, where the gaps remain and what management needs to do next.
An audit becomes useful when each conclusion can be traced to an agreed criterion, an assessment procedure and a dated record. Our scope starts with the decision your organisation needs to make.
A customer assurance request, management review and targeted identity assessment can require different criteria, samples and report structures. Name the intended reader and the decision they need to make before collecting evidence.
A defined review across the relevant controls
- IT security audit — A cross-functional view of security controls, their operating evidence and the decisions needed to reduce risk.
- Microsoft 365 & Entra ID audit — Review tenant security, privileged access, conditional access and collaboration controls against an agreed baseline.
- Cloud security audit — Assess cloud governance, identity, logging, exposure and recovery evidence across selected AWS, Azure or Google Cloud environments.
- Identity & privileged-access audit — Examine identity lifecycle, privileged access, service accounts and access-review evidence across your selected directories.
- Security governance & risk audit — Assess whether security policy, risk ownership and management reporting support timely and accountable decisions.
- Incident readiness & recovery audit — Review whether escalation, response authority and recovery arrangements are supported by usable evidence.
- Supplier security control review — Assess oversight, access and evidence responsibilities for selected critical technology suppliers.
- Secure development & change audit — Review change approval, release controls, secrets ownership and security evidence through selected development workflows.
Three different questions
| Question | What the assessment should establish |
|---|---|
| Design | Would the stated control address the defined risk if it operated as described? |
| Implementation | Does configuration or documentation support that the control has been introduced? |
| Operation | Do records from the agreed period show the control operating for the selected samples? |
A report that supports action
Each finding should identify the criterion, procedure, observed condition, evidence reference, risk and recommendation. Management adds an owner and target date. A closure plan explains what must be re-examined before the finding can be considered resolved.
State the limits alongside the conclusion
Record excluded platforms, unavailable evidence, point-in-time observations and sample limitations. A limited review does not justify an unqualified statement about the entire organisation. Formal certification, statutory opinions and penetration testing have different engagement requirements.
Build your audit scoping brief, or send your requirements with an NDA or RFP. High-level context is sufficient for the first conversation.
Primary sources
- Atlant Security IT security audit
- NIST Cybersecurity Framework
- NIST SP 800-53A assessment methodology
General information, not a compliance opinion. Confirm legal applicability and security service requirements for your entity and jurisdiction.
Prepare a brief before the scoping call
Describe the decision your audit needs to support, the entities and platforms in scope, and the evidence period. We help distinguish control design, operating evidence and questions that need further validation.
Use the free cybersecurity audit brief builder to record objectives, assessment areas, constraints and NDA preferences. Review the proposed scope, then send it directly to Atlant Security through the contact form.
