AI ERP with agents inside the systems you run
AI phone and voice agents for real calls
LLM.coPrivate, self-hosted LLM deployments
Legal AI infrastructure for firms
AI RFP discovery and response drafting
Automatic.coBusiness process automation
CyberAttack.aiThreat detection and defense
Secure AI virtual data rooms10 business days
To start a security engagement
Assessment through first findings
100%
Senior engineers, US-based
On every security engagement
Every sprint
Working software on a preview URL
For remediation and build work alike
100%
Code, reports, and findings you own
From the first commit
Where cybersecurity work shows up
The services behind "cybersecurity development," specifically
The term covers several distinct engagements that get bundled under one label. Here's what each one actually is.
Risk assessments and audits
A structured review of your infrastructure, application, and data-handling practices against a known framework, producing a prioritized list of what's actually exploitable versus what's theoretical. This is usually the first engagement, not an add-on to a build.
Cybersecurity strategy
Deciding, deliberately, what level of security investment matches your actual risk — a public SaaS product handling payment data needs a different posture than an internal tool behind a VPN, and treating them the same wastes budget in one direction and leaves gaps in the other.
Secure software development
Dependency scanning, secrets management, access control, and code review built into the development pipeline itself, so vulnerabilities get caught before a merge rather than after a scan finds them in production.
Simulated-attack testing
Controlled attempts to breach your own defenses — application penetration testing, infrastructure testing, or a narrower vulnerability scan depending on scope — run to find what a real attacker would find, on a schedule you control.
Secure data storage
Encryption at rest, access control scoped to least privilege, and backup and recovery practices that hold up against both accidental loss and a deliberate breach attempt.
Managed monitoring and support
Ongoing log review, alerting, and patch management for teams that don't have (and don't want to build) a standing security operations function of their own.
Standards and frameworks
The compliance frameworks that actually shape an architecture
These are standards we build to, not certifications DEV.co holds. The attestation, where one applies, is performed by your own auditor against your organization — what we control is whether the underlying system is built to pass that review.
SOC 2
An attestation about organizational controls — access management, change management, monitoring, incident response — examined by an independent auditor. We build the logging, access control, and change-management practices a SOC 2 audit checks; the report itself is issued to you, not to us.
PCI DSS
Applies the moment a system touches cardholder data. The architecture goal is almost always to shrink PCI scope — tokenizing card data at the edge, using a processor's vault — because a smaller scope is cheaper to secure and cheaper to audit than a wide one.
HIPAA
Governs protected health information: who can access it, how it's encrypted, and what gets logged when it's viewed or changed. It's a set of required controls and a business-associate agreement, not a certification a vendor can hold.
NIST and CIS frameworks
General-purpose security control catalogs many organizations use as a baseline even without a specific regulatory mandate. Useful as a structure for a risk assessment even when no external audit requires one.
Encryption and key management
Data encrypted at rest and in transit as a baseline, with key rotation and access scoped so that a compromised application credential doesn't also hand over the keys to everything it touches.
What's involved
Cybersecurity engagement types
What moves the scope is the size of the attack surface and how much of it is currently undocumented — a handful of services behind a known architecture is a different engagement than a sprawling infrastructure nobody has fully mapped.
| Engagement | Commitment | Timeline | What's included |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security risk assessment | Fixed scope | 1 – 3 weeks | Infrastructure and application review, a prioritized findings list ranked by actual exploitability, and a remediation plan. |
| Secure SDLC hardening | Fixed scope | 3 – 6 weeks | Dependency scanning, secrets management, access control, and code-review gates wired into your existing CI pipeline. |
| Simulated-attack (penetration testing) engagement | Fixed scope | 2 – 5 weeks | Controlled attempts to breach the application or infrastructure, a written findings report, and a retest once fixes ship. |
| Cloud and infrastructure security hardening | Fixed scope | 3 – 8 weeks | Network segmentation, least-privilege access review, encryption at rest and in transit, and backup and recovery validation. |
| Managed monitoring | Ongoing retainer | Ongoing | Log review, alerting, and patch management sized to your environment, without standing up a security team of your own. |
Ranges assume US-based senior engineers and include a written report and remediation guidance rather than a raw scan output. An assessment is the usual first step because it's the fastest way to find out which of these an environment actually needs before committing to the rest.
Secure development
What "secure software development" is, in practice
Not a separate phase bolted onto the end of a build. These are the practices that belong inside the pipeline from the first sprint.
Dependency and vulnerability scanning
Automated scanning of third-party packages against known vulnerability databases, run on every build, not on a quarterly cadence — most real-world breaches trace back to a known, unpatched dependency rather than a novel exploit.
Secrets management
API keys, database credentials, and tokens live in a secrets manager, not in source control or an environment file committed by accident. A leaked secret in a public repository is one of the most common and most preventable breach paths.
Access control and least privilege
Every service and every person gets the minimum access required to do its job, reviewed periodically rather than accumulating permissions indefinitely. A compromised low-privilege account should not be able to reach the whole system.
Secure architecture review
A design review before major features ship, asking specifically what happens if this component is compromised, not just whether it works. Catching a design flaw here is far cheaper than finding it after launch.
Logging and audit trails
Enough logging to reconstruct what happened during an incident, written to a store the application itself can't quietly alter — without it, an incident response is mostly guesswork.
Incident response readiness
A written, tested plan for who does what during a breach or suspected breach, decided calmly in advance rather than improvised during the incident itself.
Where risk actually lives
Network, data storage, and the cloud layer
Application-layer bugs get the headlines. In practice, a large share of real incidents trace back to infrastructure and storage misconfiguration instead.
Network segmentation
Separating what's reachable from the public internet, what's reachable only from inside the network, and what's reachable by nothing at all reduces how far a single compromised service can spread — an attacker who reaches one component shouldn't automatically reach every other one.
Cloud configuration
Publicly readable storage buckets, overly broad IAM roles, and default security-group rules left open account for a large share of cloud breaches — not sophisticated exploits, just configuration nobody reviewed after it was first set up.
Backup and recovery
Backups that are never tested for restoration are a false sense of security, and backups reachable by the same compromised credentials as production don't protect against ransomware at all. Both have to be verified, not assumed.
Availability and denial-of-service resilience
Rate limiting, traffic filtering, and a plan for absorbing a traffic spike — malicious or not — belong in the architecture before an outage, not as a reaction to the first one.
Small businesses are targeted routinely, not rarely
Automated scanning for known vulnerabilities doesn't discriminate by company size, and a smaller footprint is not the same thing as a lower-priority target to an attacker running the same scan against thousands of systems at once.
Testing and remediation
Simulated attacks and vulnerability assessment, done on a schedule
The value of this work depends entirely on what happens after the findings come back, not just on running the test.
Vulnerability scan vs. penetration test
A vulnerability scan checks known signatures automatically and quickly; a penetration test has a person actively trying to chain weaknesses together the way an attacker would. Most environments benefit from both, on different cadences.
Scope the test to what you actually run
A test scoped to your real architecture — the APIs, the auth flow, the specific integrations — finds more than a generic checklist run against infrastructure nobody bothered to map first.
Remediation priority beats a long findings list
A report with fifty low-severity findings and no ranking is less useful than one with the five that are actually exploitable ranked first. Fix order matters more than fix count.
Retesting closes the loop
A fix that hasn't been retested is an assumption, not a resolution. The engagement isn't done until the specific finding is verified closed, not just marked complete in a ticket.
Third-party and vendor risk
Every SDK, API integration, and vendor with access to your systems or data extends your actual attack surface beyond what your own code review covers, and it's worth an explicit inventory rather than an assumption that vendors have handled their own side.
Testing cadence should match your release pace
A system that ships weekly and gets tested annually has months of unreviewed changes between checks. Match the testing cadence to how fast the system actually changes, not to a calendar habit.
Related
Related services
What security work usually connects to.
Questions
Common questions about cybersecurity development
What teams ask before a first call.
It depends on which of several distinct services you need: a risk assessment, secure SDLC practices built into your pipeline, simulated-attack (penetration) testing, secure data-storage architecture, or ongoing managed monitoring. Most engagements start with an assessment, because it's the fastest way to find out which of the others actually applies.
A written report and a prioritized remediation plan are part of every engagement here, not a separate deliverable billed later.
Those are attestations issued to an organization by an independent auditor against its own controls, not a certification a development vendor holds or can transfer to your product. What we do is build the access control, logging, change management, and encryption practices that a SOC 2 or ISO 27001 audit actually examines, so your own attestation process goes smoothly when you run it.
Be cautious of any vendor claiming to be "SOC 2 certified" as a company — the attestation applies to a specific organization's controls, not to software built by a third party.
A structured review of your infrastructure, application code, and data-handling practices, producing a findings list ranked by what's actually exploitable rather than a raw list of every theoretical issue. It ends with a remediation plan you can act on with or without us.
Most assessments run one to three weeks depending on the size of the environment and how much of it is currently documented versus something we have to map first.
Yes — both are architecture requirements we build around regularly. For HIPAA, that means access controls, encryption, and audit logging around protected health information, plus the business-associate agreement your legal team will need in place. For PCI DSS, it means shrinking cardholder-data scope through tokenization and a processor's vault wherever possible.
Neither is a certification DEV.co issues; both involve your own compliance process on top of an architecture built to support it.
Dependency and vulnerability scanning on every build, secrets kept out of source control in a dedicated secrets manager, least-privilege access control, and a code-review gate before anything merges. These run inside your CI pipeline rather than as a separate audit step after the fact.
Most real-world breaches trace back to a known, unpatched dependency or a leaked credential rather than a novel exploit, which is why these specific practices are the ones we prioritize first.
A written report ranking findings by actual exploitability, not just severity in the abstract, plus a remediation plan. Once fixes ship, we retest the specific finding rather than assuming a code change closed it — a fix that hasn't been retested is an assumption, not a resolution.
All findings and reports are yours, in writing, whether or not we do the remediation work ourselves.
Yes, for teams that need standing log review, alerting, and patch management but don't want to build a security operations function in-house. It's sized to your environment as an ongoing retainer rather than sold as a fixed headcount, and it typically follows an initial assessment so the monitoring is built around risks that have actually been mapped.
You do, entirely. Assessment reports, penetration-test findings, and any remediation code all belong to you, and infrastructure changes happen in your own cloud account. Nothing about this work locks you into a vendor relationship to act on what we find.