Reversec becomes independent following WithSecure divestment

WithSecure completes the sale of cybersecurity consulting business to Neqst

[Stockholm, 31 May 2025] Reversec, a new name in cybersecurity consulting, is now an independent company following the completion of the business’ divestment by WithSecure to Swedish investment firm Neqst. This marks an exciting new development for both companies.  

The deal, first announced on 23rd January 2025, was finalized on 31st May 2025. As part of the agreement, Neqst has paid €13.5 million in cash, with the remaining amount to be paid based on the business’s performance over the next two years. 

“Reversec gives us the freedom to be agile and focused on offensive-driven security,” said Scott Reininga, Incoming CEO for Reversec. “We think like attackers, using real-world tactics to uncover weaknesses before they can be exploited. Our goal is to turn that insight into clear, actionable strategies that help clients stay ahead and make cybersecurity a true business advantage.” 

Tobias Edvardsson, CEO of Neqst and Chairman of Reversec adds, “The company is home to an exceptional team of cybersecurity thought leaders, serving some of the world’s largest and most demanding clients. We are delighted to welcome Reversec to our portfolio of leading IT services firms, where it will serve as a natural and valuable complement. Establishing the company as a standalone entity, supported by our expertise and strategic resources, positions it for an exciting growth journey ahead.”

Reversec signage


Approximately 230 skilled employees from Finland, the UK, Sweden, Denmark, Singapore, Italy, and the US now make up Reversec, launched in April 2025.

Media contact

Kelly Friend
+44 (0)7880 488357
kelly.friend@reversec.com

Related content

Our thinking

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity

April 28, 2025
Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity
Our thinking

Reversec joins UK Cyber Security Council

May 7, 2025
Reversec joins UK Cyber Security Council
Our thinking

Addressing SaaS security challenges in the age of GenAI

April 29, 2025
Addressing SaaS security challenges in the age of GenAI

Connecting the dots:
Shared requirements
of ISO 27001, NIS2,
DORA, and NYDFS

What do security standards and regulations like ISO 27001, NIS2, DORA and NYDFS have in common? A lot actually. We’ve mapped out the shared requirements for you.

The cybersecurity landscape is flooded with regulations as governments worldwide respond to complex and frequent cyber threats, data breaches, and national security worries. CISOs across various sectors must now navigate a web of compliance requirements that vary by region and industry. However, the core requirements of security standards and regulations like ISO 27001, NIS2, DORA and NYDFS are often very similar. 

“The big secret about regulations and security standards is that they are all essentially the same.”

Four of our top global security and risk management experts have taken the ISO 27001 standard and mapped it against these key regulations:

  • The Network and Information Security Directive 2 (NIS2)
    • Raises the baseline across critical sectors in Europe and moves organizations toward prevention, accountability, and context‑driven risk reduction.
  • The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA
    • Sets a single, principle-based standard for operational resilience in the EU financial sector. Applies across twenty financial entity types and introduces EU‑level oversight for critical third‑party providers.
  • The NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation (23 NYCRR Part 500)
    • Sets prescriptive expectations for financial institutions in New York, including board cybersecurity expertise, mandatory social‑engineering exercises, tabletop drills, and crisis management testing.

The result is a practical whitepaper outlining their common security policies, controls, and activities to help you kick-start your security risk management journey.

Download the whitepaper to discover

  • What each of these regulations means in practice 
  • Where and to whom they apply
  • What these regulations have in common, and 
  • What you can start doing right now to become compliant with all of them 
WHITEPAPER

Connecting the dots: Shared requirements of ISO 27001, NIS2, DORA, and NYDFS

Download

Related content

Our thinking

Insights into the NIS2 Directive

June 1, 2024
Insights into the NIS2 Directive
Our thinking

NYDFS 500 vs. DORA: Comparison for European financial institutions

February 16, 2024
NYDFS 500 vs. DORA: Comparison for European financial institutions
Webinars

Cracking the NIS2 Code: Compliance Solutions and Practical Advice

May 22, 2024
Cracking the NIS2 Code: Compliance Solutions and Practical Advice

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity

New company unites decades of experience to deliver consulting services grounded in pioneering research

[Stockholm, 28 April 2025] Reversec launches today as a new name in cybersecurity consulting, dedicated to helping businesses overcome their most complex security challenges. Formerly known as the Consulting unit of WithSecure, Reversec focuses on turning pioneering research into practical solutions that help organizations stay ahead of threats.

With an emphasis on offensive, proactive, strategies, Reversec ensures businesses are prepared to tackle evolving security risks. By combining deep industry experience with a commitment to continuous research, Reversec delivers straightforward and effective services that not only protect but also strengthen its clients’ operations.

Launching Reversec as a new company allows us to focus on being a nimble, research-led cybersecurity consultancy with an aim to redefine offensive security” said Scott Reininga, Executive Vice President of Reversec. “We adopt a hacker mindset, simulating the tactics and strategies used by cybercriminals so we can turn complex security challenges into clear solutions and make cybersecurity a strategic advantage for our clients.”


Reversec unites expertise from leading names in the cybersecurity world, including MWR Infosecurity, F-Secure, WithSecure, Digital Assurance, nSense, and Inverse Path. With over three decades of combined experience, the team brings unmatched knowledge to help organizations build stronger defenses and reduce risks. Reversec is also committed to openly sharing its expertise with clients and the wider community, encouraging informed decisions about security.

Media contact

Kelly Friend
+44 (0)7880 488357
kelly.friend@reversec.com

Related content

Events

An evening celebrating our new brand and extensive expertise

Wednesday, May 7 ― 18:30 - 22:30
An evening celebrating our new brand and extensive expertise
Events

Introducing Reversec: An evening celebrating our new brand and extensive expertise

Wednesday, June 4 ― 17:00 - 22:30
Introducing Reversec: An evening celebrating our new brand and extensive expertise
Whitepapers

Connecting the dots: Shared requirements of ISO 27001, NIS2, DORA, and NYDFS

March 28, 2025
Connecting the dots: Shared requirements of ISO 27001, NIS2, DORA, and NYDFS

How to run successful Kubernetes attack simulations?

Learn how to run successful Kubernetes attack simulations with this straightforward guide.

Why run Kubernetes attack simulations?

Imagine a newly created Kubernetes cluster, exposed on the Internet. According to a 2023 threat report, it takes only 22 minutes before it starts receiving attacks. This statistic emphasizes that it’s not a matter of “if” but of “when”, someone will target your cluster.  

Attack simulation exercises allow organizations to take a proactive stance by simulating real-world threats to identify vulnerabilities, detect malicious activities, and work towards building a resilient defense.  

These “purple team” exercises are not just about finding gaps. They’re an essential tool for security and operations teams to better understand real-world threats, as well as their own capabilities. 

Step 0: Threat Modelling 

Before carrying out an attack simulation against any target, it is essential that the threats posed against it are understood well. Kubernetes environments are no different, where the first step involves answering critical questions like:

  • What are the assets that need to be protected?
  • Where could attacks originate from?
  • What would motivate attackers to target a Kubernetes cluster?

Let’s start with the attack surfaces. From an offensive security perspective, this will also help us identify the levels we must execute in, in order to simulate these attacks. 

The most common entry point for attackers is at the container level—where the application code runs, within pods. For example, think of a compromised web server or a backdoored image that found its way into the cluster. If the pod has access to a service account, the attacker may interact with the Kubernetes control plane, potentially expanding their reach. 

Should they manage to break out of the pod, they gain access to the underlying node. From there, they could attempt to impersonate core components like the kubelet, which would effectively elevate their privileges. They could also try to access other Kubernetes resources running on the same node that maybe in a different namespace that was not previously accessible.

Attacks can also originate from external sources, such as the Internet, or any network the control plane listens to. Think of scenarios like leaked or stolen credentials, a compromised service, a malicious or coerced user and so on… 

Attack surfaces in a Kubernetes cluster

Incentives of the Kubernetes attacker

Once a threat actor is inside the cluster, their end goals may vary. An obvious objective is the workloads – the applications running on Kubernetes – with an intention to access sensitive data, modify proprietary software, or perform supply chain attacks

However, in many cases, the target is more direct: money.  In the age of cryptocurrency, computer resources are a target in itself, due to its immediate potential for financial returns. And Kubernetes nodes are not immune to this pattern.

Finally, Kubernetes clusters –especially those deployed in cloud environments– present another attack opportunity: Instead of targeting applications, attackers might try to breach the overarching infrastructure –whether cloud or on-premises– and get a foothold into this other realm. 

Kubernetes is also a less-monitored platform compared to traditional on-premise and Windows estates, which makes it an ideal place for attackers to establish persistence and hide their activities, allowing for long-term, undetected operations.  

Step 1: Execution of a Kubernetes attack simulation

Once the threats to the particular environment in question are understood, one can proceed to carry out the actual simulation. Let’s assume there are two main approaches to go about this – depending on what the end goal is:

  1. Objective-based adversary emulation involves replicating the exact attack chains of real-world threat actors, with specific goals (e.g., data theft). Threat intelligence like this can be found aggregated on platforms such as the Wiz Cloud Threat Landscape.

  2. Breadth-first capability assessment focusing on greater coverage of TTPs, executed individually (de-chained) with the aim to evaluate – or baseline for the future – the overall defensive capability. For a map of the entire space of TTPs available, Microsoft’s Threat Matrix for Kubernetes comes in handy.

Tools, tools, tools

At this point we should have a clear idea and vision for the exercise, leaving only the “How” to answer. Of course, one can always default to “manual” methods, interacting with the cluster as usual (kubectl, HTTP clients, shelling on pods etc.) but it’s worth knowing that there are plenty of tools out there for this purpose, that could make our lives easier.  

Let’s look at a few of them:

  • Leonidas, Reversec’s cloud attack simulation framework, has recently been updated to support Kubernetes environments as well. Like its AWS predecessor, it’s built to be extensible, friendly to write attack test cases without being a developer, and easy to interact with programmatically, through an API – enabling use within e.g. CI/CD pipelines.
  • Atomic Red Team is the well-known ART framework that supports a few atomics for containers, and a couple for the Kubernetes control plane. However, it’s not really built for cloud environments.
  • Stratus Red Team on the other hand, was built specifically for the Cloud and for attack simulations, making it a great choice for our purpose – it even supports eight pure Kubernetes test cases! 
  • Peirates is another option one might consider, if the attacks we chose previously happen to match those hard-coded in Peirates. It’s been used by threat actors themselves after all! Nevertheless, room for customization will be minimal. 

Step 2: The defender’s perspective in attack simulations

Attack simulations aren’t just about running offensive exercises but improving defenses.  

As stated earlier, the ultimate goal is to upskill defenders and build operational capability. So let’s take a moment to to talk about defenders, what they should expect and how they can prepare for an exercise like this. 

Aspects of the traditional SOC are not irrelevant here: Log sources, blind spots, SIEM ingestion, detection rules and even EDR concepts. All of which can be applied to container orchestration environments.  

Logs are the cornerstone of security monitoring, and in Kubernetes too. This can be challenging in practice, however, due to the lack of an official, built-in, centralized logging solution (“cluster-level” logging). Users are responsible for setting up their own logging architecture to suit their needs. At the same time, there are many types of logs In a Kubernetes cluster, which can be broadly categorized into:

  1. Application/container logs capturing the output from the applications running in containers
  1. Kubernetes component logs, which are logs from core components like the API server and kubelet
  1. Logs from external sources, which are also crucial for the security of the ecosystem, such as cloud provider logs, if you’re using a cloud-managed Kubernetes service (e.g., IAM logs)

Naturally, not all these log sources are useful for detecting security threats. The rule of thumb is that those of security interest will be those answering the questions:

  • Who acted?
  • What did they do?
  • When and where from?

Kubernetes audit logs: The key to attack detection

From the various sources available, the API server’s Audit logs can be considered the most valuable source for security monitoring, as they record the interactions with the Kubernetes API server.

They can capture suspicious actions like unauthorized access or secret listings. They are not enabled by default, and administrators need to first define an audit policy, setting adjustable verbosity levels to each event or event class. Crafting the perfect policy for your cluster – one that provides the visibility necessary while balancing the noise generated– will be a continuous process requiring tuning and experimentation. By enabling audit logs and forwarding them to a centralized location, detection engineering teams can then proceed to write alert rules upon certain attack patterns in those logs. These building blocks enable creation and sharing of these “attack signatures” in a platform agnostic format such as Sigma rules.

As for the other attack surfaces in scope, visibility into container- and node-level activity can be achieved with tools like Falco, Hubble, and Tetragon. These solutions leverage the Linux kernel’s eBPF functionality, to monitor Kubernetes nodes, providing EDR-style alerting on platform events such as suspicious command execution or network connections etc.

Conclusion

In summary, attack simulations offer a proactive approach in building defenses, and this is no different in Kubernetes environments.

Once a good understanding of the threat model for the ecosystem in question is in place, blue and red teams can collaborate with the methods we described in this article, to build resilience and stay on top of new threats.

Now’s the time to get ahead of attacks!

Contact us to learn how we can help secure your Kubernetes environment.

Attack Path Mapping

Attack Path Mapping

Read more

Related content

Our thinking

Top 5 common misconfigurations in cloud environments – and how to avoid them

January 28, 2025
Top 5 common misconfigurations in cloud environments – and how to avoid them
Whitepapers

Microsoft Azure Security Framework

August 5, 2021
Microsoft Azure Security Framework
Our thinking

Private: Kubernetes network encapsulation: Identification and exploitation

September 2, 2024
Private: Kubernetes network encapsulation: Identification and exploitation

Addressing SaaS security challenges in the age of GenAI

A response to JPMorganChase’s open letter

Thank you to JPMorganChase and Patrick Opet for their open letter addressing the evolving landscape of technology and the critical role of suppliers in this journey. We appreciate the great practical and proactive approach being taken to ensure a robust and resilient supply chain.

For this purpose of our response, we’ve focused on a few issues highlighted which, based on our extensive experience, we can share insights on.

SaaS integration risks in GenAI applications

Opet’s letter identifies how modern SaaS integration patterns erode security boundaries. We see this challenge magnified in the GenAI space, where organizations rush to integrate language models into their applications without proper security architecture. The software supply chain risks described manifest clearly in how companies implement language model capabilities – prioritizing features over security fundamentals.

Key findings from LLM application testing

LLM vulnerabilities don’t exist in isolation. Traditional weaknesses combine with GenAI-specific issues to create new attack chains. Media focus remains on hallucinations and jailbreaking LLMs to produce CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear) content, while organizations integrating GenAI into their own solutions face different risks – primarily prompt injection attacks that enable social engineering, data exfiltration, and denial of service. Security teams often test LLM behavior and application security separately, missing critical attack patterns.

SaaS security challenges

At a practical level, there are two very common areas where SaaS applications fail to provide adequate security. The first is gating single sign-on functionality behind additional cost or the “enterprise” price plans, forcing users to make a trade-off between adequate identity security and cost. The second is comprehensive, high-fidelity audit logging, which is often also gated behind expensive plans or add-ons, if available at all. These limitations hinder an organization’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to attacks against their SaaS estate.

We hope that SaaS vendors see this open letter as a call to arms and work towards providing a hardened, secure-by-default experience to their consumers.

How Reversec can help

We are here to support organizations in determining and quantifying the risks posed by their SaaS applications, and can assess/audit how they’re deployed and configured to ensure they’re hardened to an appropriate level.

Based on our work with enterprise clients actively integrating GenAI features into their products, we’ve developed practical security solutions that address the real-world risks in LLM applications. These tools emerged from direct collaboration with development teams facing these challenges daily, and we’re excited about the potential for joint initiatives that can drive innovation and create value for all.

  • Spikee: Open-source tool for testing LLM application resilience against security threats.
  • LLM Application Security Canvas: Our framework implements four critical rules:
    • Treat the LLM as untrusted: Applications must be designed with the assumption that LLMs can be manipulated by attackers and should never implicitly trust their outputs for sensitive operations.
    • Validate LLM outputs: Block dangerous content like unauthorized URLs, JavaScript, and markdown images. Detect specific harm categories including hate speech, violence, and self-harm. Use real-time hallucination and off-topic checks to prevent model drift.
    • Validate LLM inputs: Block common jailbreak/prompt injection patterns using machine learning methods, including semantic search with embeddings, specialized classifiers, and LLM-as-judge techniques. Apply topical guardrails and semantic routing to ensure queries match intended scope. Implement instruction/data separation through spotlighting techniques.
    • Implement adaptive content moderation: Dynamic moderation systems identify and block malicious patterns, while suspending accounts that repeatedly attempt exploitation.
Webinars

Building secure LLM apps into your business

Read more
Building secure LLM apps into your business
Webinars

Building secure LLM apps into your business

Watch now
April 11, 2024

Related content

Our thinking

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity

April 28, 2025
Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity
Our thinking

Prompt injections could confuse AI-powered agents

May 17, 2024
Prompt injections could confuse AI-powered agents
Whitepapers

A risk-based formula for security testing

May 25, 2024
A risk-based formula for security testing

Top 5 common
misconfigurations in
cloud environments

Many organizations believe that once their cloud environment is configured, their job is done. But this “set it and forget it” mentality can lead to major security vulnerabilities. Cloud environments are dynamic and require regular updates and reviews – to adapt to new threats and changes. Not staying on top of your cloud configurations can leave you with outdated security measures and put you at increased risk.

Another common misconception is that an initial entry point breach isn’t likely to happen to you. Organizations often set up security controls to restrict user logins and limit access to development environments. This in turn results in these controls being often treated as a complete security boundary that cannot be crossed. However, that is not entirely true. Attackers are becoming increasingly sophisticated, which is why it’s crucial to operate under the assumption that a breach can, and eventually will, happen to you. This mindset will help you evaluate the potential impact of a breach and implement measures to minimize damage.  

Ready to see what we typically encounter in our engagements? Let’s dive in! 

It’s crucial to operate under the assumption that a breach can, and eventually will, happen to you.

#1 Excessive privileges

One of the most common problems in cloud environments is the granting of excessive privileges to users and machine accounts. This misconfiguration can lead to privilege escalation, where a malicious actor gains higher-level access than intended. Cloud providers offer thousands of granular permissions, making it hard for administrators to fully understand the potential impact of each one.

For example, an application might only need permissions to read and write in a specific storage bucket or database resource but it might be granted additional, unnecessary permissions, increasing the risk if the account is compromised. The solution involves carefully reviewing and limiting permissions to the minimum level necessary for each role. This process can be time-consuming, especially for larger organizations, but it’s key to maintaining security. 

Here are some practical ways to limit excessive privileges

  1. Segregation of organizational workloads:
    Where possible, different applications and the resources required by them should be provisioned into their own granular unit (AWS account, Azure subscription or GCP project, etc.). This would provide a strong control to minimize the impact of excessive permissions and limit the impact of a compromised identity.

  2. Review current permissions:
    Regularly audit the permissions granted to users and machine accounts. Identify and remove any unnecessary privileges.

  3. Implement role-based access control (RBAC):
    Use RBAC to assign group permissions based on roles within an environment and the level of access appropriate to that workload. This helps ensure that users only have access to what they need.

  4. Use temporary credentials:
    Where possible, use temporary credentials that expire after a certain period. This reduces the risk of long-term exposure.

  5. Automate where possible:
    Utilize automation tools to help manage and review permissions. While some manual review is always necessary, automation can significantly reduce your workload.

#2 Poor secrets management

Another common misconfiguration that impacts organizations of all sizes is poor secrets management. This issue often leads to privileged escalation opportunities within a cloud environment. With the widespread adoption of cloud infrastructure, ClickOps is just no longer practical, especially for organizations running multiple projects. As a result, many companies have turned to infrastructure as code (or IaC) to manage their cloud environments. 

IaC allows you to define your company’s cloud infrastructure using templates in a human-readable code format. These templates define how your cloud environment should look and how individual resources should be configured. But while this approach does simplify the management of large estates, it can also introduce poor development practices, such as storing credentials or secrets in plain text within these templates. 

The risks of poor secrets management

Storing secrets in plain text is a major security risk. Any user with access to these files can potentially use the exposed credentials to perform unauthorized actions on resources they typically wouldn’t have access to. For example, if a storage bucket’s credentials are stored in plain text, an attacker could gain access to sensitive data stored in that bucket. Similarly, hard-coded credentials could allow unauthorized access to other applications or services, leading to data breaches or other security incidents.

Follow these steps to improve secrets management

  1. Use secure key storage:
    Store secrets in secure key management services or vaults. These services provide a secure way to manage and access secrets without exposing them in plain text.

  2. Reference secrets securely:
    Instead of hard-coding secrets into templates, reference them from secure storage. This way, the actual secrets are fetched dynamically during execution, reducing the risk of exposure.

  3. Regular audits:
    Conduct regular audits of your IaC templates and other deployment scripts to ensure no secrets are stored in plain text. Automated tools can help you identify and remediate these issues.

  4. Educate developers:
    Make sure your developers understand the importance of secure secrets management and follow best practices when writing IaC templates. 

#3 Long-lived credentials

Closely related to poor secrets management is the issue of long-lived credentials. While not inherently a vulnerability, long-lived credentials can pose significant security risks if not managed properly. These credentials, which have long expiry windows, can be exposed in various ways, such as being accidentally committed to public code repositories, left unprotected in deployment templates or more generally insecurely handled by human users. 

Take these practical steps to mitigate the risks of long-lived credentials

  1. Avoid storing credentials in plain text:
    As with secrets, avoid storing long-lived credentials in plain text. Use secure storage solutions instead.
  1. Use short-term credentials:
    Where possible, use short-term credentials that expire after a short period. For example, AWS recommends using temporary credentials gained from a federated identity provider instead of using long-lived IAM user credentials.
  1. Regularly rotate credentials:
    Implement a policy to regularly rotate machine credentials to minimize the risk of exposure.
  1. Monitor and audit:
    Continuously monitor and audit the use of credentials to detect any unauthorized access or anomalies.

#4 Exposure of public endpoints

Cloud providers design their services to be user-friendly and easily manageable, often more so than traditional on-premise infrastructure. But this convenience comes with its own set of risks. One of the biggest is that resources in the cloud often have public endpoints, making them accessible from anywhere in the world

The risks of public endpoints

Public endpoints let users interact with cloud resources directly via the Internet. While this is convenient for management purposes, it also means that if an attacker gains access to your environment, they can do whatever they want from wherever they may be. For example, if an attacker compromises your account, they could log in from another country and make changes to your resources without any geographical restrictions. 

This issue is particularly prevalent in Azure, where public endpoints are often the default configuration for many resources. However, many organizations don’t need these endpoints to be public and would benefit greatly from restricting access.

Here are some simple tips on how to manage public endpoints

  1. Restrict access with IP Allow Lists:
    Configure endpoints to only be accessible from specific IP addresses. That way you can control who can access your resources based on their IP location.
  1. Use private endpoints:
    Where possible, make endpoints private so that they are only accessible from within your cloud environment. This adds an additional layer of security by limiting external access.
  1. Regular audits:
    Conduct regular audits of your cloud environment to identify and secure any public endpoints that don’t need to be exposed.
  1. Assume compromise:
    Work under the assumption that your environment could be compromised. By restricting public endpoints, you’ll limit the potential damage an attacker can do if they gain access.

    Here’s an example
    Imagine a storage bucket that contains sensitive data. If this bucket has a public endpoint, anyone with the right credentials can access it from anywhere. By restricting access to specific IP addresses or making the endpoint private, you’ll ensure that only authorized users within your network can interact with that data. This will greatly reduce the risk of unauthorized access and data breaches. 

#5 Overly exposed internal networking

The last cloud misconfiguration on our list is overly exposed internal networking. This issue has been around for years, even in traditional on-premise networks. Organizations do often focus heavily on protecting their environments from external threats with robust perimeter defenses. But once an attacker gains a foothold inside your network, most of those internal protections aren’t enough to keep you safe

The risks of overly exposed internal networking

In many cloud environments, internal network segmentation isn’t implemented to the level that it should be. Engineers might allow certain IP ranges to communicate freely for testing purposes, or resources might be deployed in a flat network structure. This lack of internal segmentation means that if an attacker compromises one resource, they can potentially move laterally within the network, accessing other resources that should be isolated. 

For example, if an attacker compromises a virtual machine (VM) in the cloud, they could use it as a stepping stone to reach other sensitive applications or data. Without proper internal network segmentation, an attacker can move freely, increasing the risk of a significant breach.

Follow these steps to improve your internal network segmentation

  1. Implement network segmentation:
    Divide your cloud environment into smaller, isolated segments. Make sure that only necessary communication is allowed between these segments.
  1. Use security groups and network ACLs:
    Use security groups and network access control lists (ACLs) to define and enforce network traffic rules. This will help you restrict unnecessary communication between resources.
  1. Regularly review and update your network policies:
    Conduct regular reviews of your network policies to make sure that they are up-to-date and reflect the current needs of your environment. Remove any unnecessary permissions or access.
  1. Keep an assume breach mindset:
    Work under the assumption that a breach is possible. Evaluate the potential impact of a compromised resource and implement controls to minimize the blast radius.

    Here’s an example
    Consider an application that only needs to communicate with a database and a few other services. By segmenting the network and restricting the application’s communication to only these necessary services, you’ll be reducing the risk of lateral movement by an attacker. If the application is compromised, the attacker would have limited access and would be unable to reach other resources.

You don’t have to do it alone – Reversec can help

As the digital landscape evolves, avoiding these top 5 misconfigurations in the cloud will help your organization stay safe in an increasingly complicated and threat-laden world.

Here’s how we can help.

Assumed breach assessments
Think it can’t happen to you? Think again. We help organizations conduct assumed breach assessments by simulating attacks as specific user personas within your company. It’s a strategic service designed to identify potential actions from that user’s perspective and addresses vulnerabilities. It helps you identify issues and resolve them comprehensively – before a real breach happens.  

Collaborative exercises
Staying on top of security – together. Collaborative exercises with a security consultancy like Reversec are invaluable to keeping your organization and sensitive data safe. These exercises offer fresh perspectives, helping you to identify and fix any misconfiguration issues you may have. Initial assumptions made during the setup of a cloud environment may no longer be relevant as services and features change. Regular reviews and updates are key to maintaining a secure environment.

The value of fresh perspectives
Having a fresh pair of eyes review your cloud environment can reveal things your team may have missed. Our security consultants can help you understand why certain configurations were set up in the first place and, when needed, propose more secure alternatives. Together, we’ll ensure that your environment is always secure and up-to-date with the latest best practices.

Challenging assumptions
Cloud environments are complex, and it’s crucial to question assumptions about service operations. Organizations should continuously review and understand the exact risks posed by their cloud configurations. Through our research-driven approach, we help companies in identifying the gap between what cloud providers claim is possible and what is practically achievable – essentially, the difference between theoretical and practical functionality. 

Misconfigurations in cloud environments often occur due to misunderstood nuances to how cloud resources operate in any provider and due to a lack of regular holistic auditing of the deployed resources.

By assuming that breaches are possible, evaluating user access, conducting assumed breach assessments, and collaborating with security experts, you can significantly enhance your organization’s cloud security posture. This proactive approach will not only secure your environment but also make it more resilient against potential attacks.

If you would like to hear more about how we can help you protect your cloud environment, don’t hesitate to contact us!

Our Cloud Security experts are happy to help.

Related content

Our thinking

How to run successful Kubernetes attack simulations?

February 21, 2025
How to run successful Kubernetes attack simulations?

Reversec joins UK Cyber Security Council

A new collaboration to enhance cybersecurity standards and shape the future of the industry

[London, 7 May 2025] Reversec, a new name in cybersecurity consulting, has joined the UK Cyber Security Council as its latest Spotlight Member. This prestigious membership underscores Reversec’s commitment to advancing cybersecurity standards and fostering a collaborative environment within the cyber community.

Reversec will work alongside the Council and its other members to develop and promote nationally recognized standards for cybersecurity, supporting the NCSC’s strategy to make the UK the safest place to live and work online. Reversec’s mission is also closely aligned with the continuing aims of the Council to increase representation and make cybersecurity more accessible and diverse to all those with an interest in it.

“Joining the UK Cyber Security Council further highlights our commitment not only to redefining offensive security, but also to advancing security standards and creating a secure digital environment for the UK,” said Scott Reininga, Executive Vice President at Reversec. “It’s also incredibly important to us that we support and develop the next generation of cyber professionals, so we’re looking forward to collaborating with other industry leaders to help shape the future of the profession.”

Joining the UK Cyber Security Council underscores Reversec’s dedication to enhancing security standards and ensuring a safe digital environment for the UK

“We are delighted to welcome Reversec as our latest Spotlight Member. Reversec’s aims are well aligned to those of The UK Cyber Security Council and we look forward to working in partnership with them to uphold and promote professional standards across the cyber community, helping make the UK the safest place to live and work online,” adds Victoria Henneker, COO for The UK Cyber Security Council. “Their mission to help create an accessible and diverse sector whilst advocating for, and supporting the next generation of, cyber professionals leads way to an exciting and impactful partnership.”

More information about the UK Cyber Security Council is available on its website UK Cyber Security Council, with further information about Reversec available here: https://www.reversec.com

Media Contact

Kelly Friend
kelly.friend@reversec.com
+44 (0)7880 488357

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity
Our thinking

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity

Read more
May 7, 2025

Related content

Our thinking

Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity

April 28, 2025
Introducing Reversec: Shaping the future of offensive cybersecurity
Our thinking

Addressing SaaS security challenges in the age of GenAI

April 29, 2025
Addressing SaaS security challenges in the age of GenAI
Whitepapers

A risk-based formula for security testing

May 25, 2024
A risk-based formula for security testing

CloudWatch Dashboard (Over)Sharing

VIP Cyber Security Breakfast

Special Guest Speaker: Richard Suls

Join us for an insightful session with Richard Suls, Senior Security Advisory Consultant from WithSecure’s New York office, as he presents:

Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Benefits of a Current State Assessment

Even the most skilled CISOs can benefit from an external perspective on their information security. With extensive experience conducting reviews across various companies, we offer a comprehensive and unbiased viewpoint. Our approach helps you step back from the details to see the broader landscape, driving progress and innovation. We excel at translating technical insights into strategic language that resonates with leadership teams.

This will be followed by two engaging sessions delivered by our expert consultants:

AI Security and Cyber Threats, by Antti Laatikainen, Principal Consultant and PCI Service Lead at WithSecure Consulting

CISO Relationship with Business Continuity Risk, by Ondrej Doubek, Senior Security Consultant at WithSecure Consulting

Agenda:

08:30 – 09:00       Breakfast, WithSecure Wood City offices
09:00 – 09.10       Welcome by Janne Kauhanen, Account Director & Cyber-translator, WithSecure Consulting
09:10 – 09:55       Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Benefits of a Current State Assessment by Richard Suls, Senior Security Advisory Consultant at WithSecure Consulting                           
10:05 – 10:50       AI Security and Cyber Threats by Antti Laatikainen, Principal Consultant & PCI Service Lead at WithSecure Consulting
11:00 – 11:45        CISO Relationship with Business Continuity Risk by Ondrej Doubek, Senior Security Consultant at WithSecure Consulting
** End of the VIP Breakfast Event **
11:45 – 12:30 Lunch
12:30 – Doors will be opened at Disobey, Kaapelitehdas
18:00 – 22:00 VIP After Party, WithSecure Wood City, 7th Floor

Related content

Our thinking

Striking the balance – EU AI Act and its impact on cybersecurity

April 16, 2024
Striking the balance – EU AI Act and its impact on cybersecurity
Our thinking

Generative AI security: Findings from our research

October 18, 2024
Generative AI security: Findings from our research
Our thinking

Reversec (former WithSecure Consulting) at Disobey 2024

February 19, 2024
Reversec (former WithSecure Consulting) at Disobey 2024

Webinar: Navigating regulatory waters: Cost-effective risk assessments for financial services

Multiple regulatory frameworks require a risk assessment – NYDFS, FedLine and FedRAMP to name a few – but that doesn’t necessarily mean you need a full ISO/IEC 27005. Join us for our latest webinar as we break down and detail what you really need for a cost-effective and compliant risk assessment.

In this session, our experts – Miguel Gutierrez and Richards Suls – will share their insights on recent framework developments and break down a risk assessment exercise for a financial services company using Reversec’s methodology.

Why Watch?

By watching this webinar, you will benefit from:

  • An enhanced understanding of the specific risk assessment requirements for key regulatory requirements
  • A practical knowledge of what a compliant risk assessment looks like without the need for a full ISO 27005
  • Learning from a real-life example of a risk assessment exercise for a financial services organization
  • Having your specific questions answered during our interactive Q&A session

Speakers:
Richard Suls, Senior Security & Risk Management Consultant
Miguel Gutierrez, Host & Security Consultant

Related content

Webinars

NYDFS 500 Cybersecurity Regulation Enforcement Actions: Causes and Consequences

September 5, 2024
NYDFS 500 Cybersecurity Regulation Enforcement Actions: Causes and Consequences
Webinars

NYDFS 500: Simplifying the second amendment

June 13, 2024
NYDFS 500: Simplifying the second amendment
Whitepapers

NYDFS 500 – Plan for stronger cybersecurity compliance

July 1, 2024
NYDFS 500 – Plan for stronger cybersecurity compliance
Our thinking

NYDFS 500 vs. DORA: Comparison for European financial institutions

February 16, 2024
NYDFS 500 vs. DORA: Comparison for European financial institutions
Whitepapers

NYS DFS 500 amendment explainer

May 25, 2024
NYS DFS 500 amendment explainer