Skip to main content
Threatsys

Security Consulting & Compliance

GRC Security Compliance

Unified governance, risk and compliance operating model across frameworks.

GRC as-a-Service

Every engagement includes manual validation, a two audience report and free re-testing.

Get a scoped quote+91 96682 00222

What this actually is

Most organisations do not have a governance problem, they have a fragmentation problem. Risk lives in one spreadsheet, controls in another, audit findings in email, and policies in a folder nobody opens. Each is maintained by a different person and none of them agree with the others.

GRC work is about making those one thing. A single control set, mapped once to every framework you have to satisfy, so evidence gathered for one audit serves the rest. Done properly it removes more effort than it adds, which is the only reason anyone should do it.

We build this to be operated by your team rather than by us. If the model only works while we are in the room it has failed.

What we go after

  • A unified control framework mapped across every standard you are held to
  • Risk register with a methodology that produces comparable scores
  • Policy architecture, reduced to what people will actually read
  • Control ownership assigned to named people rather than departments
  • Evidence collection defined once and reused across audits
  • Audit and assessment calendar with dependencies made visible
  • Exception and risk acceptance process with expiry dates
  • Board and committee reporting that answers what they actually ask

How we run it

  1. 01

    Gap assessment

    We measure you against the standard as it is actually audited, not as it reads on paper.

  2. 02

    Remediation plan

    Every gap gets an owner, an effort estimate and a date. You decide what lands this quarter.

  3. 03

    Implement and evidence

    We write the policy, build the control and collect the artefact that proves it is working.

  4. 04

    Internal audit

    A dry run under audit conditions, so nothing in the real one is a surprise.

  5. 05

    Certify and maintain

    We sit on your side of the table for the audit, then keep the evidence current between cycles.

What you receive

  • Unified control framework with cross-framework mapping
  • Risk register and scoring methodology
  • Rationalised policy set
  • RACI across controls
  • Evidence catalogue showing which artifact serves which audit
  • Reporting pack templates for board and committee

Who needs this

Organisations carrying three or more compliance obligations, or anyone whose audit effort is growing faster than the business.

How long it takes

Eight to twelve weeks to build. It only pays back once your team is operating it, which takes another quarter.

Standards this satisfies

  • ISO 27001
  • SOC 2
  • PCI DSS
  • DPDP Act 2023
  • NIST CSF
  • RBI
  • SEBI CSCRF

Why it matters

Almost nobody starts a certification because they want one. It starts because a customer will not sign without it, a regulator has asked, or a deal is sitting still while procurement waits for evidence. The commercial driver is real and it is worth being honest that it, rather than security, is usually what pays for the programme.

The security benefit is real too, but it comes from a specific place: the discipline of having to evidence that a control operated over a period, rather than that it was configured once. That is the part that changes behaviour, and it is also the part organisations consistently underestimate.

Choose how you want this delivered

Most of the price difference between quotes comes down to this one choice, and it is rarely explained. Pick one to see what it covers, what it suits and what it costs you.

Gap assessment, then we work alongside your team through remediation, internal audit and the certification audit itself. Your people do the work and own the outcome, which is what makes the management system survive after we leave. This is what most organisations should choose.

Choose this when

  • You have a team who can absorb the work alongside their day job
  • You want the capability to remain in-house afterwards
  • First certification where documentation is the main gap

Effort and cost

Moderate. The calendar is longer than a managed programme because the work competes with everyone's existing responsibilities.

Scope it yourself, before you call anyone

Answer a few questions and you get an indicative number, the working behind it and what your answers tell us. It runs in your browser, so nothing you type reaches us.

1/5

Which framework are you going for?

What we look for, and keep finding

These are the classes of problem this work exists to surface. Not every engagement finds all of them, but these are the ones that turn up often enough to be worth naming.

  • Controls that exist on paper only

    The policy says quarterly access reviews. The evidence shows one, eighteen months ago, and it was not completed. This is the single most common audit finding across every framework.

  • Scope drawn too narrowly

    A certificate covering a subset of the business that customers assume covers all of it. Auditors check the boundary; buyers rarely do. Getting scope right is the most consequential early decision.

  • Evidence that cannot be reproduced

    A screenshot proves a control was configured on the day someone took it. A framework wants proof it operated throughout the period. Those are very different, and the gap only appears at the audit.

  • Exceptions with no expiry

    Risk accepted once, recorded, and never revisited. Over a few years these accumulate into an undocumented second control framework nobody is managing.

  • Third parties outside the boundary

    Processing carried out by a supplier who was assessed at onboarding and never since, while your obligation for their handling of your data continues regardless.

Who runs your engagement

A lead assessor who has sat on the other side of the table

Compliance work is led by an assessor who has taken organisations through certification, not by a consultant reading the standard for the first time with you. They know which findings a certification body will actually raise, which is a different list from what the standard technically says.

Questions we get asked

Do we need a GRC tool?

Not to begin with, and buying one first is the classic mistake. A tool imposed on an unclear control model produces an expensive version of the same confusion. Get the model right, operate it in something simple, then buy a tool once you know what you need it to do.

How much duplicate work does this actually remove?

Where an organisation holds three or four certifications, we typically see fifty to seventy percent of evidence requests overlapping. That is the saving. If you only carry one obligation, a full GRC programme is probably not worth it and we will say so.

Who should own this internally?

Someone with authority to say no. GRC owned by a coordinator with no mandate becomes a chasing function and quietly dies. It does not have to be a large role, but it has to be a real one.

Can you run it for us instead?

We can operate it as a managed service, and for smaller teams that is often sensible. We would still insist that control ownership stays with your people, because accountability cannot be outsourced even when the work is.

Often scoped alongside

Ready to scope your grc security compliance?

Thirty minutes with a senior engineer, and you leave with a written scope and indicative effort.

Book a 30-min consultation+91 96682 00222