We assess and implement AWS and Kubernetes environments where security controls are enforced at the infrastructure layer, mapped to SOC 2 and NIST 800-53, and backed by evidence generated from real system state.
Automated Evidence • Remediation Roadmaps • Infrastructure Readiness Validation
Policies may exist. Controls may be defined. But at the AWS API, Kubernetes control plane, and CI/CD layers, enforcement often breaks down.
Methodology
Traditional compliance workflows often rely on manual evidence collection and fragmented infrastructure visibility. Verdith translates infrastructure findings into evidence and prioritized remediation guidance.
Evaluate cloud environments against control-aligned configurations and evidence expectations.
Prioritize remediation paths across identity, logging, encryption, and infrastructure exposure risks.
Validate remediation paths and infrastructure changes before implementation using infrastructure-as-code validation workflows.
Generate audit-ready evidence artifacts directly from observed infrastructure state.
# Control-aligned infrastructure # SC-13 • Encryption at Rest resource "aws_eks_cluster" "secure" { encryption_config { resources = ["secrets"] provider { key_arn = var.kms_key } } enabled_cluster_log_types = [ "api", "audit", "authenticator" ] } // Control evidence derived from enforced infrastructure state
Outputs
Technical findings are translated into artifacts that engineering teams can act on and audit stakeholders can validate.
Evidence
Timestamped audit evidence derived from observed cloud state and organized for review.
Risk
Security findings translated into audit impact, business risk, and remediation priority.
Action
A prioritized plan showing affected infrastructure scope, recommended actions, and verification criteria.
Readiness
Infrastructure-as-code validation used to confirm remediation paths before changes are applied.
Control Coverage
Least privilege, MFA, OIDC, RBAC, and privileged access boundaries.
AC • IA
CloudTrail, Kubernetes audit logs, API activity, and centralized retention.
AU
KMS-backed storage encryption, secrets protection, and secure transport.
SC
Baseline enforcement, drift detection, and policy-as-code guardrails.
CM
Engagement Model
Work is structured around designing, implementing, and enforcing control-aligned infrastructure — not advisory-only compliance support.
Fixed-scope technical review
Validate whether AWS and Kubernetes controls are actually enforced before deeper implementation work begins.
Typical Engagement
100% Credited towards Implementation
Typical timeline: 8–12 weeks
Design and implement AWS and Kubernetes environments aligned to SOC 2 security expectations with enforceable infrastructure controls.
Typical Engagement
From $25,000
Typical timeline: 10–16 weeks
Build a cloud-native foundation aligned to federal security control expectations and readiness requirements.
Typical Engagement
From $40,000
Ongoing assurance workflow
Maintain control enforcement and evidence generation over time as infrastructure changes.
Typical Engagement
Billed monthly
Assessment Demo
Review an assessment workflow including infrastructure findings, remediation guidance, and audit-ready evidence outputs.
View Assessment DemoAssessment Findings
42
identified controls requiring remediation
Post-Validation Review
6
unresolved findings remaining
• Logging enabled
• Encryption enforced
• Public access restricted
• IAM privilege boundaries strengthened
Designed for teams operating AWS and Kubernetes environments where security controls must be enforced with evidence derived directly from system state for SOC 2, NIST 800-53, FedRAMP readiness, and continuous assurance requirements.
Request Technical Review
Provide architecture context for your audit or readiness requirements.