Security testing for business and operating environments
GDF helps business IT teams, security leaders and industrial operators evaluate exposure, validate authorized attack paths and plan remediation. The scope follows your systems, operating constraints and reporting needs.
Principal services
The starting point may be a business network, an application, an industrial process or its supporting records. Agree on authorization and operational limits before testing begins.
Test authorized network and application attack paths and validate the consequences of material weaknesses. Define targets, access, exclusions and stop conditions, then give the technical team evidence, remediation priorities and an agreed retest scope.
Scope a network or application testAssess industrial access, segmentation, monitoring and recovery readiness around the process your team operates. Documentation review and passive observation establish context; engineering approves the methods and timing of active validation.
Plan an assessment around operationsConnect operational security findings, incident readiness and supporting evidence across infrastructure environments. Scope the technical questions and reporting audience, then select the assessment, incident or audit-evidence work that fits.
Explore infrastructure security and evidence supportTrace application identity, authorization, data flows and trust decisions through the agreed source version. Combine manual review with SourceScan to assess candidate findings and explain their conditions, security consequences and remediation.
Discuss a codebase or release reviewScope and delivery
A useful assessment explains what was examined, what the findings mean in your environment and what should happen next.
A vulnerability assessment identifies and prioritizes weaknesses across an agreed scope. Penetration testing investigates authorized paths and the conditions under which a weakness can have a security consequence. One does not automatically replace the other.
Discuss the business decision, system owners, test identities, available logs, data handling and permitted validation. For production and industrial systems, include operating constraints and conditions for stopping work.
Review vulnerability assessment scopeThe reporting scope can include affected systems or code, observed evidence, preconditions, business or operating consequences, recommended changes and remaining limits. Leadership and engineering may need different levels of explanation from the same findings.
Agree which corrections will be retested and what establishes closure. References to a testing method or framework do not by themselves establish certification, regulatory compliance or an absence of vulnerabilities.
Prepare a penetration-testing scope requestSpecialist routes
Follow the technical scope below. The detailed service pages describe methods, prerequisites and evidence limits without treating every assessment as the same engagement.
Start with the decision you need to make. Exposure assessment, application testing and recurring validation serve different purposes.
Choose a specific industrial service when the scope centers on supervisory systems, incident evidence or audit support.
Review governance, architecture and technical behavior of AI systems. This work is distinct from using AI tools during a penetration test.
An active event needs preservation and response coordination. Preparedness work defines useful records and responsibilities before an incident.
Additional service routes
A defined system or reporting question may call for a narrower service than a general test. These routes connect technical work to the environment and the decision it supports.
Choose a defined architecture or system review when the question concerns segmentation, assets, connected devices or a mainframe environment.
These services support a defined business decision or technical evidence requirement. Applicability, scope and reporting responsibilities should be agreed for the organization involved.
People and supporting technology
Tools help identify candidates. Technical judgment establishes what a finding means in the application or operating environment under review.
Joseph Caruso's biography describes his software, databases, business systems and incident-response experience. Robert Knudsen's biography covers computer forensics, cybersecurity and computer and network operations.
Review the published qualifications and discuss the team and technical scope for your engagement.
Meet the GDF teamSourceScan is GDF-owned and developed and maintained with PNNX. It supports AI-assisted source analysis and findings and remediation tracking. The security review still needs the relevant source version, application context and validation of material findings.
For code ownership, copying or disputed software behavior, follow the separate expert-witness service.
Preserve useful logs and records before remediation changes them. An investigation may require device, email or cloud analysis alongside response and security testing. The scope should distinguish observed access from possible access and record gaps.
Explore Digital Forensics & LitigationDescribe the environment, assessment objective, operating constraints and deadline. Identify the people who authorize testing and the reports they need. Arrange secure sharing before sending credentials, source code or detailed architecture.
For work across locations, review our regional engagement information and discuss the assessment and coordination needs at each site.
For an active incident, call. A form submission does not create an engagement.
Talk with an examiner
Tell us the systems, evidence and deadline. We can review relevant experience, potential conflicts and the scope before engagement.
Since 1992 · 24/7 dispatch · Court-tested experts