Separate identity
Distinct accounts, roles and administrative paths for backup, with minimum access and controlled break-glass mechanisms.
- MFA and privileged access
- Separate administration domain
- Logging and alerting
We design and test recovery for ransomware and destructive attacks: immutable copies, isolated identities, a clean recovery environment, business priorities and runbooks that can be executed under pressure.
Modern ransomware targets backup infrastructure, administrative accounts and restore mechanisms. Resilience comes from separating these dependencies and validating them together.
Distinct accounts, roles and administrative paths for backup, with minimum access and controlled break-glass mechanisms.
Immutability, isolation and retention are tested against compromise scenarios, not only operational mistakes.
A controlled environment where identity, images and data are verified before services return to production.
A restored database does not mean the service works. Identity, DNS, network, applications, integration and teams must return in an executable order.
Objectives are tied to real technical capability and operating impact, not copied from a template.
Explicit roles, approvals, dependencies, steps, checkpoints and escalation criteria.
Infrastructure, security, applications, management and communications work through one scenario.
Assessment starts with critical services and compromise scenarios. We trace each dependency to a protected copy and a safe way to return it to operation.
What must return, in what order, with which data and identity, network and supplier dependencies.
How accounts, consoles, repositories, keys and the control plane could be compromised.
Protection tiers, access, retention, clean environment and technical recovery sequence.
Run a controlled scenario, measure time, capture blockers and update the plan from evidence.
Deliverables connect technical architecture to operational decisions and create a measurable baseline for future exercises.
Services, data, identities, platforms and suppliers in the order required for return.
Separation, immutability, access, retention, monitoring and clean recovery for the environment.
Steps, roles, evidence, decision points and communications for a destructive incident.
Measured time, observed blockers, residual risk and prioritized backlog.
Answers must be validated through architecture and exercises. If they exist only in policy, the risk remains.
A copy that cannot be changed or deleted during its defined retention period, including by ordinary administrative accounts. Effectiveness also depends on identity, configuration, isolation and control-plane protection.
It is a useful starting point, not a guarantee. Access to copies, identity separation, data integrity, application dependencies and actual restore capability still need validation.
Frequency should reflect environment change and service criticality. Tests can range from regular technical restores to full cross-functional exercises for high-impact services.
Disaster recovery usually addresses outage and infrastructure failure. Cyber recovery assumes the environment, identities and backup may be compromised and adds isolation, integrity checks and clean-environment restoration.
Yes. The approach is vendor-neutral. We assess whether existing architecture and operations meet recovery scenarios and recommend change based on risk, not automatic platform replacement.
Tell us what needs to be protected, tested or recovered. The first conversation is confidential, direct and free of product pitches.
Choose the need, provide essential context and your request goes directly to the senior team.
Do not include passwords, sensitive logs or incident details in your first email. We will establish a secure channel together.