Cloud security assessment in India (AWS, Azure, GCP)

Cloud security posture management tools are valuable for continuous hygiene. A PoCForge assessment is not a substitute for continuous monitoring, and a CSPM CSV is not a substitute for adversarial review. We use tooling where it helps coverage, then prioritise findings that create realistic attack paths — for example an over-privileged role reachable from an exposed workload, or a public bucket that holds more than marketing assets.

• Cloud providers and account/subscription/project IDs in scope
• Whether production is included or staging mirrors are preferred
• Identity model (SSO, IAM users, workload identities)
• Crown-jewel data stores and internet-facing services
• Any compliance narrative you need the report to support (without claiming we certify you)

If your procurement mandates a CERT-In empanelled assessor, verify the official CERT-In empanelled organisations PDF against the contracting legal entity. Quality of testing and empanelment status are related but not identical questions — see our CERT-In guide.

You receive validated findings, practical remediation guidance and evidence showing how identified weaknesses could affect your environment. Severity reflects real impact, and client detail stays confidential.

Early AWS account grown by engineers. A single account accumulated public buckets, broad developer IAM and a production VPC. Assessment prioritises identity and exposure before deep service-by-service trivia.

Multi-account landing zone. Shared services, logging accounts and workload accounts need path analysis across trust boundaries — not only “high” findings inside one account.

Cloud plus product security. When customer questionnaires ask about both application testing and cloud controls, pair this assessment with web or API testing so the narrative is complete.

Fix the path, not only the scanner label. Closing a public storage finding matters; removing the role that could exfiltrate after a workload compromise often matters more. Reports should help you sequence identity hardening, network exposure reduction and detective controls without pretending every medium finding is equal.

Cloud providers secure the underlying platform; you secure identity, configuration, data and often the network design you chose. Assessments that only recite provider shared-responsibility slides without inspecting your accounts waste money. PoCForge focuses on the controls and paths you actually own inside the agreed scope, and we will say when a finding is primarily a provider-platform limitation rather than something you can patch tomorrow.

For India-market buyers comparing vendors, ask each firm: do you deliver attack-path narratives, or only tool exports? Do you include a retest? Are indicative prices published? Our ranges and process are on this site so you can compare statements of work with less ambiguity.

• Which accounts hold production data versus experimentation?
• Who can create public resources today, and is that logged?
• Are break-glass credentials monitored?
• Which third-party integrations assume standing cloud keys?
• What does “success” look like for leadership after this assessment?

Clear answers shorten fieldwork and improve remediation workshops afterward. Reach us via contact when you are ready.

Large delivery factories can be the right fit for some procurement programmes. Boutique testing suits product companies that want senior attention on their specific architecture, clearer writing, and careful scoping. PoCForge is intentionally small: we publish prices, decline work that is a poor fit, and focus on validated impact. If you need a global brand stamp more than depth, say so — we would rather redirect you than oversell.