Cloud Security Audit

WHOAMI’s Cloud Security Audit service provides a business‑aware cloud security assessment (AWS, Azure, GCP) to reduce exposure, improve identity governance, and strengthen traceability. We identify relevant weaknesses and deliver a prioritized plan by operational impact (data, continuity, unauthorized change, audit readiness), avoiding generic lists without context.

Cloud Security Audit Service in Spain

WHOAMI provides cloud security audits in Spain for organizations migrating to cloud, running critical workloads, or needing defensible evidence for internal/external audits. We scope by accounts/subscriptions/projects and by critical services.

For organizations with critical cloud workloads

In cloud, risk changes fast: identities, permissions, infrastructure changes, and public exposure can evolve in days. A useful audit goes beyond “reviewing settings”: it maps controls to consequences and prioritizes improvements that reduce real risk without slowing the business.

Objective and scope (what’s in, what’s out)

The objective is to identify weaknesses affecting confidentiality, integrity, availability, and traceability across the cloud environment. Typical scope includes:

• Identity and IAM: roles, privileges, MFA, segregation, third‑party access
• Network and exposure: segmentation, public endpoints, rules, perimeter control
• Data: encryption, keys, secrets, backups, retention
• Observability: logging, alerting, traceability, evidence
• Governance: policies, guardrails, tagging, change control

What we validate (and why it matters)

A mature cloud audit translates findings into business impact. Examples:

• Excessive privileges: increases the likelihood of unauthorized change and data exposure
• Unnecessary exposure: expands public surface and abuse risk
• Secret handling gaps: raises leakage risk and unwanted persistence
• Lack of traceability: makes detection, investigation, and audit evidence harder
• Weak governance: causes risk to re‑appear with every change or deployment

Cloud audit vs posture management tools

Posture management tools (CSPM, etc.) help flag signals. The audit adds:

• Context: what matters for your business vs what is noise
• Decisions: guardrails, permission models, segregation, change control
• Prioritization: what to fix first to reduce real risk

Typical engagement options

• Account/subscription review: identity, exposure, logging, data controls
• Service‑focused review: deep focus on critical components (e.g., identity, storage, exposure)
• Phased approach: baseline + hardening + evidence review (ideal for large environments)

Deliverables (what you receive)

• Executive report (risk, impact, priorities, decisions)
• Technical report with evidence, context, remediation guidance
• 30/60/90 roadmap (quick wins, stabilization, structural improvements)
• Suggested backlog for cloud/security teams
• Review session to align an implementation plan
• Follow‑up review (optional) to confirm critical improvements

What we need to start

For an efficient engagement:

• Scope (accounts/subscriptions/projects and included/excluded services)
• Read‑only access whenever possible (security and traceability)
• Minimal inventory of critical workloads and objectives (audit readiness, continuity, exposure)
• Technical point of contact to validate design decisions and exceptions

How we prioritize (defensible criteria)

We prioritize by impact (data, continuity, reputation), exposure (public surface/roles), likelihood (existing controls), and cost/benefit—so the plan is executable and reduces risk measurably.

Timelines and planning

It depends on environment size, account count, and depth. As a guideline:

• Scoped environment: typically 1–2 weeks
• Mid‑size environment (multiple accounts + governance/logging): typically 2–4 weeks
• Large environment: phased (baseline + hardening + evidence)

What this audit is NOT (service boundaries)

• Not a certification nor a guarantee of total security
• Not a checklist without prioritization or impact
• Not a how‑to guide: we describe risk and impact, not offensive recipes