You can't fix what you can't see - and most environments carry more exposure than anyone realizes. ALINEDS runs vulnerability assessments and firewall rule audits that find, prioritize, and explain the weaknesses across your systems and network, ranked by real risk rather than raw scanner output. You get a clear, evidence-backed remediation plan mapped to recognized controls, so limited security budgets go to the exposures most likely to be used against you - and you walk into audits with proof in hand.
Why it matters
Scanners produce thousands of findings; almost none tell you what to fix first. For public-sector teams with tight budgets and hard audit deadlines, the value isn't the scan - it's the prioritization and the evidence. Knowing which handful of exposures actually matter, and being able to show an auditor how you found and closed them, is what turns a report into reduced risk.
What you get
Vulnerability assessment
We assess systems and network for weaknesses and misconfigurations across your environment.
Firewall rule-base audit
We review firewall rules for stale, shadowed, and over-permissive entries that widen your attack surface.
Risk-based prioritization
We rank findings by severity, exploitability, and exposure so remediation effort goes where it counts.
Remediation roadmap
We deliver a clear, sequenced plan with control mappings, not a raw finding dump.
Audit-ready evidence
Findings are documented and mapped to NIST 800-53 / CSF for auditors.
Retest & validation
After you remediate, we can retest to confirm the issue is actually closed - so 'fixed' means verified, not assumed.
How it works
Scope
Define the systems, network, and firewalls in scope.
Assess & audit
Run the vulnerability assessment and firewall rule audit.
Prioritize by risk
Rank findings by real-world risk, not raw scores.
Remediation roadmap
Deliver a sequenced, control-mapped plan (and retest).
Where it fits
Pre-audit readiness
Find and close exposures before a GovRAMP, CJIS, or PCI assessment.
Firewall cleanup after years of changes
Audit and tighten a rule base that's grown over-permissive.
Risk-based remediation planning
Turn an overwhelming scanner report into a prioritized plan.
Third-party / M&A due diligence
Assess the security posture of a system or partner before you rely on it.
Key distinctions
Vulnerability assessment vs. penetration test
| Aspect | Vulnerability assessment | Penetration test |
|---|---|---|
| Goal | Find & prioritize weaknesses broadly | Exploit specific ones to prove impact |
| Coverage | Wide across the environment | Narrow, depth on chosen targets |
| Output | Prioritized remediation plan | Proof of exploitability |
| Cadence | Regular / continuous | Point-in-time |
| Best for | Knowing what to fix first | Demonstrating real-world impact |
Compliance & security
Findings that double as audit evidence
Findings are documented and mapped to NIST 800-53 and NIST CSF 2.0, and support PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and CJIS assessment evidence. The same report drives remediation and satisfies auditors - one effort, two outcomes.
- NIST 800-53
- NIST CSF 2.0
- PCI-DSS
- HIPAA
- CJIS
- GovRAMP
Key terms
- Vulnerability assessment
- A systematic review that finds and prioritizes security weaknesses across systems and networks.
- Firewall rule audit
- A review of firewall rules to remove stale, shadowed, or over-permissive entries.
- Risk-based prioritization
- Ranking findings by severity, exploitability, and exposure rather than raw scanner score.
Frequently asked
What's the difference between a vulnerability assessment and a penetration test?
An assessment finds and prioritizes weaknesses broadly and hands you a remediation plan; a pen test exploits specific ones to prove impact. We focus on breadth and prioritization so you know what to fix first.
How do you decide what to fix first?
We rank findings by real risk - severity, exploitability, and exposure - not raw scanner scores, so limited time goes to the issues most likely to be used against you.
What does a firewall audit actually check?
Stale rules, overly permissive access, shadowed or conflicting rules, and misconfigurations that quietly widen your attack surface - then we recommend a tighter policy.
Will this produce evidence we can hand to an auditor?
Yes. Findings are documented and mapped to recognized controls, so the same report supports remediation and audit evidence.
How often should we do this?
Regularly - and especially before an audit or after major network changes. Exposure accumulates as systems and rules change.
Do you help fix the findings or just report them?
We deliver a sequenced remediation roadmap and can validate that fixes actually closed the issue.
Do you assess cloud and on-prem environments?
Yes. We assess on-premises systems, cloud workloads, and the network between them, plus the firewall rules that connect them - so the picture is complete rather than stopping at one boundary.