- Repositories, runners, build identities, and release workflows have expanded faster than their security model.
- Security checks exist in CI/CD but create noise, inconsistent blocking, or unclear exception paths.
- Secrets, third-party actions, build permissions, or artifact integrity have become a material concern.
Service 04
DevSecOps & CI/CD Security Assessment
Assess delivery pipelines, repositories, runners, secrets, build controls, security tooling, artifacts, and release governance across modern CI/CD environments.
Lean-team friendlyRemote-first · worldwideFrom $4,500
DevSecOpsCI/CDGitHubGitLab
Starting priceFrom $4,500
Indicative USD baseline for a clearly bounded scope.
Typical delivery1–2 weeks
Calendar timing depends on access, evidence, target size, and stakeholder availability.
Commercial modelFixed scope
Scope, assumptions, deliverables, timeline, and price are confirmed before delivery begins.
Baseline scopeOne primary CI/CD ecosystem covering repositories, runners, identities, secrets, tooling, artifacts, and release governance.
No surprise hourly overages on agreed packaged work. If the scope changes materially, additional work is agreed in writing before it starts.
When this service fits
Recognize the decision before choosing the scope.
01
Where can the delivery pipeline be abused to change code, credentials, artifacts, or releases?
02
Which findings should block, warn, or route to a backlog based on risk and signal quality?
What we review
Focused on the controls that change real product risk.
The exact evidence set is tailored during discovery. A typical engagement covers the areas below.
- Repository and branch protection
- CI/CD identities, permissions, runners, and third-party actions
- Secrets handling and credential exposure
- SAST, SCA, IaC, container, and DAST integration
- Artifact integrity, signing, provenance, and release evidence
- Blocking vs. non-blocking gates, exceptions, and developer workflow
Deliverables
A decision package — not a scanner export.
Recommendations are prioritized, contextualized, and structured so engineering and leadership can move from findings to action.
Pipeline security map
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
Control and coverage assessment
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
Risk-based gating model
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
Tooling and workflow recommendations
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
Reference implementation guidance
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
Prioritized remediation plan
Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.
“Security gates are designed around risk, signal quality, and ownership — not “block everything” defaults.”Engagement principle
Engagement shape
Clear scope. Evidence. Priorities. Remediation.
01Discover
Goals, environment, constraints, evidence, and success criteria.
02Review
Technical and process assessment with targeted automation where useful.
03Prioritize
Risk, attack paths, engineering effort, and business context.
04Enable
Report, roadmap, workshop, and optional remediation validation.
Typical engagement: 1–2 weeks for one primary CI/CD ecosystem.
Client side of the engagement
Know what changes, what is needed, and what can follow.
What changes after
- Pipeline security becomes a set of deliberate controls rather than disconnected scanner steps.
- Gates and exceptions are aligned to material risk, ownership, and developer workflow.
What we need from you
- Read-only access to representative repositories, CI/CD configuration, runners, and release workflows.
- Security-tool output plus information about secrets handling, artifact storage, signing, and deployment handoff.
Natural next steps
Related
Build a broader engagement.
01
Product Security Program Assessment
Know where your Product Security program stands — and what to improve first.
02Secure SDLC Assessment
Build security into the way software moves from idea to production.
03Secure Architecture & Threat Modeling
Find architectural risk before it becomes production vulnerability.
Discuss this service
Start a conversation →Bring the architecture, problem, or current security backlog.
We can define the smallest useful scope and a clear output before work begins.