Question answered
Does current configuration match what the organization intends, and where does it not?
Independent IT security review
Choose the engagement that answers your real question.
“Security audit” gets used for several different engagements that answer different questions with different evidence. This page compares them plainly so the wrong one is not purchased by mistake.
- Before any access
- Written question and scope
- Agreed evidence method
- No automatic tenant changes
This engagement: a scoped configuration review.
This site’s engagement examines agreed Microsoft 365 configuration evidence and produces findings, decisions, and an optional remediation plan.
Evidence used
Policy definitions, role assignments, licensing, and tenant or business context agreed in writing.
What it is not
Not a penetration test, not a compliance certification, and not a claim of ongoing monitoring after the review period.
Penetration testing asks a different question.
A penetration test attempts to exploit weaknesses under a defined methodology and rules of engagement, rather than reviewing configuration intent.
Question answered
Can a defined attack path actually be exploited within the agreed scope and timeframe?
Evidence used
Active testing activity against agreed systems, typically requiring its own authorization and safety controls.
When it fits better
When the organization needs to know whether a specific control resists an attempted attack, not only whether it is configured.
Compliance audits require a named framework.
A compliance audit or certification measures an organization against a specific named standard with its own evidence requirements and qualified assessors.
Question answered
Does the organization meet the specific requirements of a named framework or contractual obligation?
Evidence used
Framework-specific control evidence, typically gathered and attested by a qualified, often accredited, assessor.
When it fits better
When a contract, regulator, or insurer requires a named certification-something a configuration review does not produce.
Automated scans and ongoing management are different again.
A vendor security score or automated scan, and ongoing tenant management, both play a role, but neither substitutes for an independent, scoped review.
Automated scoring
A point-in-time metric can flag possible issues but does not interpret tenant context, exclusions, or business dependencies the way a review does.
Ongoing management
A recurring service that maintains hygiene and monitors change over time answers “is it still fine today,” not “what should change and why,” which is this review’s focus.
Combining engagements
These approaches can complement a scoped review; none of them removes the value of an independent look at a specific decision.
Next step
Define the review before sharing evidence.
Start with the trigger, decision, and known boundaries. Do not send passwords, recovery codes, or tenant exports.