Your findings are isolated per client and stored in access-limited environments we control. The AI we use runs under enterprise agreements with no training on your data and zero data retention, and nothing is fed into public models.
Per-client isolation, data handling and AI governed by strict contractual terms, so the map of your weaknesses never leaves your control.
Offensive testing handles your most sensitive material: findings, credentials, evidence of exactly how you could be breached. Where it lives and who can reach it matters as much as the findings themselves.
Engagement data is isolated per organization. Your findings are never pooled with other clients or reused, so a map of your weaknesses stays yours alone.
For regulated organizations, and for defense and government-adjacent work, where your findings are stored and who can reach them is not a detail, it is a contractual requirement.
Your reports, findings and engagement records are stored and handled in access-limited environments we control here, kept to a tight, accountable footprint rather than scattered across third-party platforms.
AI is central to how we work, and that raises a fair question: does our use of AI expose your data to a model provider? We handle this deliberately.
AI processing is carried out under enterprise agreements with the model providers we use. Your data and findings are never used to train models and are covered by zero-data-retention terms, so nothing is kept after a request and nothing is fed into public models.
The most sensitive findings need the tightest control, and you should be able to see who touched what.
Access is limited to the operators who need it, in controlled environments, with actions recorded. The right people see the right detail, and nothing leaks to anyone who should not have it.
It means your engagement data and findings are isolated to your organization, stored and handled in access-limited environments we control, and never pooled, sold or fed into public models. Where your data lives, who can reach it and how it is used are all controlled deliberately, not left to chance.
No. We work with AI model providers under enterprise agreements: your data and findings are never used to train models, and are covered by zero-data-retention terms, so nothing is kept after a request. Nothing is fed into public models.
AI processing is performed by the model providers we use, under enterprise agreements with no training on your data and zero data retention. Your stored findings, reports and engagement records stay in access-limited environments we control; the AI step is governed by those contractual terms rather than left to a provider's defaults.
Your reports, findings and engagement records are stored and handled in access-limited environments we control here, keeping your data footprint tight and accountable. This supports the data-handling expectations that come with regulated, defense and government-adjacent work.
Access is limited to the operators who need it, in controlled, access-limited environments, and actions are recorded. Your findings are isolated to your organization and never shared with or reused for other clients.
Isolation, controlled data handling, no-training and zero-data-retention terms, and access limits align with the data-handling expectations in frameworks such as ISO 27001, SOC 2 and NIST SP 800-171, and we can provide the evidence your auditors need.
Scope an engagement with isolated, data handling and AI under strict no-training, zero-retention terms. Fixed scope, fixed price, no obligation.
No obligation, no sales pressure. A senior operator replies within one business day.
