Security assurance
IT Security Audits in Oakville
An audit answers a governance question: are the controls this organisation believes it has actually in place, correctly configured, and followed in practice?
At a glance
- Reviews controls, configuration, policy and real practice
- Written findings with severity and remediation guidance
- Independent of the team that would perform remediation
- Suitable evidence for clients, insurers and boards
What an audit is — and what it is not
A security audit evaluates controls against a defined standard or baseline. It examines configuration, documentation, administrative practice and the gap between the two, then reports findings with severity and recommended remediation.
It is not a vulnerability assessment, which enumerates and prioritises known technical weaknesses across systems. It is not a penetration test, which is explicitly authorised testing to establish whether identified weaknesses can be exploited in reality. Organisations frequently request one and need another; part of our initial conversation is establishing which question you are trying to answer.
It is also not a certification. We are not a certifying body and an audit from us does not confer compliance with any framework. What it provides is an evidenced, independent view of your control environment that stands up to scrutiny from a client, an insurer or a board.
- Audit: are the controls present, correct and followed?
- Vulnerability assessment: where are the known weaknesses?
- Penetration test: can those weaknesses actually be exploited?
Scope of a typical audit
Identity and access management: account lifecycle, MFA coverage, privileged accounts, conditional access, service accounts, dormant accounts and access review practice. This area produces more high-severity findings than any other.
Endpoint and infrastructure: device management coverage, patch currency, encryption, local administrative rights, server configuration, remote access mechanisms and network segmentation. Edge devices — firewalls, VPN appliances, remote access gateways — get particular attention because their unpatched vulnerabilities are actively targeted.
Data, cloud and continuity: Microsoft 365 or cloud tenancy configuration, external sharing, retention and data location, backup coverage, immutability and restore evidence. We ask to see a restore, not a report claiming one succeeded.
Governance: policies that exist, policies that are followed, third-party and vendor access, logging and retention, onboarding and offboarding practice, and whether anyone owns security as a defined responsibility.
- Identity, privilege and access review practice
- Endpoint, patch, encryption and edge device posture
- Network segmentation and remote access design
- Microsoft 365 / cloud tenancy configuration
- Backup coverage, immutability and restore evidence
- Logging, retention and monitoring arrangements
- Policy, documentation and vendor access governance
How findings are reported
Each finding states what was observed, why it matters in your specific context, its severity, and what remediation would involve including realistic effort. Findings are ordered so that the first ten items are genuinely the first ten things to do.
The report includes an executive summary written for non-technical readers — boards and owners need to understand exposure without a glossary — and a technical appendix with the detail an engineer needs to act. Evidence is included so findings can be verified independently.
Independence and remediation
Where we perform an audit for an organisation we also support operationally, that overlap is disclosed and the audit is conducted by engineers not responsible for the environment. Where an organisation wants complete separation, we will audit an environment run by another provider, or recommend that remediation be delivered by a party other than us.
Audits are most useful when repeated. An annual cycle, with a shorter interim review, catches the drift that occurs naturally as people join, projects finish and exceptions are granted for a deadline and never withdrawn.
- Auditors separate from the operational team
- Evidence retained so findings can be verified
- Remediation plan you can execute with any provider
- Re-review to confirm findings have been closed
Keep exploring
Related Oakville services
Most engagements combine several of these. Follow the thread that matches the problem you are trying to solve.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
- How long does an IT security audit take?
- Typically two to four weeks for a small or mid-sized Oakville organisation, depending on environment complexity, how much documentation already exists, and how quickly read-level access and interviews can be arranged.
- Will the audit disrupt our staff?
- Very little. Most work is configuration review and evidence gathering. Interviews with a handful of staff — whoever handles onboarding, whoever manages vendors, whoever holds administrative access — usually take under an hour each.
- Can the audit satisfy a client's security questionnaire?
- It provides the evidence base for one. Questionnaires ask whether specific controls exist; an audit establishes the truthful answer and identifies what must be implemented before you can answer positively. We do not complete questionnaires on your behalf as a certification.
- Do you need to run scanning tools on our network?
- Configuration review is largely read-only. Where scanning is included, its scope, timing and impact are agreed in writing first. Anything that tests exploitability rather than presence belongs in a penetration test with its own authorisation.
Get an evidenced view of your control environment
Independent findings, rated by severity, with remediation you can act on — and an executive summary your board can read.