BULWARKADVISORY · BY IVAN PISKUNOV
Service 06

Kubernetes & Container Security Assessment

Security review for Kubernetes, container images, workload identities, runtime permissions, manifests, and the surrounding software supply chain.

Lean-team friendlyRemote-first · worldwideFrom $4,000
KubernetesContainersRBACRuntime
Request a scope →All services
Starting priceFrom $4,000

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 cluster or platform pattern covering RBAC, workloads, images, secrets, policies, networking, and runtime paths.

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.

Good fit when
  • Kubernetes has become a production platform and RBAC, workload permissions, or cluster patterns have grown organically.
  • Benchmark outputs are large, but the platform team cannot tell which findings represent realistic product risk.
  • Privileged workloads, service accounts, secrets, ingress, or network isolation need focused review.
Questions this engagement answers
01

Which cluster and workload attack paths are realistic in this environment?

02

Where do RBAC, workload identity, isolation, and runtime permissions create material exposure?

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.

  • RBAC, service accounts, workload identity, and privilege boundaries
  • Pod security, privileged workloads, namespaces, and isolation
  • Network policies and service exposure
  • Secrets, registries, image provenance, and container configuration
  • Admission controls, policies, Helm, and deployment manifests
  • Runtime assumptions, logging, and common cluster attack paths
Deliverables

A decision package — not a scanner export.

Recommendations are prioritized, contextualized, and structured so engineering and leadership can move from findings to action.

Cluster security scorecard

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

Misconfiguration and attack-path report

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

RBAC and workload risk review

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

Hardening recommendations

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

Example policy / manifest guidance

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

Remediation and re-validation plan

Included or adapted to the agreed engagement scope.

“The review connects Kubernetes hardening to realistic attack paths instead of treating every benchmark item as equal risk.”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 a bounded cluster footprint.

Client side of the engagement

Know what changes, what is needed, and what can follow.

Outcome

What changes after

  • Platform teams get a prioritized cluster-risk view instead of treating every benchmark item as equal.
  • RBAC, workload identity, and isolation issues are translated into practical hardening actions.
Inputs

What we need from you

  • Read-only access to agreed cluster configuration and representative manifests/Helm or deployment definitions.
  • RBAC, network-policy, admission-control, registry, and workload-identity context.
Related

Build a broader engagement.

01

Product Security Program Assessment

Know where your Product Security program stands — and what to improve first.

02

Secure SDLC Assessment

Build security into the way software moves from idea to production.

03

Secure Architecture & Threat Modeling

Find architectural risk before it becomes production vulnerability.

Discuss this service

Bring the architecture, problem, or current security backlog.

We can define the smallest useful scope and a clear output before work begins.

Start a conversation →