Service · Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity as
Digital Assurance.

Security controls designed for regulated environments, focused on auditability, evidence quality and operational reality. Where systems are GxP-relevant, cybersecurity is part of the assurance model, not a separate silo.

Controls that are
demonstrably operating.

The objective is not more security paperwork. The objective is demonstrable control operation aligned to risk, intended use and audit expectation.


Typical focus areas: access and privilege governance, logging and monitoring, vulnerability management, supplier assurance, and evidence that controls operate in BAU.

01
Control baseline and gap assessmentAccess control, privilege management, logging/monitoring and vulnerability management, assessed against what is expected in regulated environments.
02
Governance and evidence designAudit-ready documentation suitable for assurance reviews and regulated stakeholder scrutiny.
03
Cloud and SaaS supplier assuranceShared responsibility control boundaries: what you control versus what you rely on the supplier to evidence.
04
BAU sustainmentOwnership, routines, escalation and measurable control operation, not just a framework on a shelf.

Defensible.
Retrievable. Practical.

Defensible control position
Risk-ranked improvement plan
A clear baseline of where controls stand, with prioritised actions, ownership and evidence expectations that hold up under auditor questioning.
Evidence you can retrieve
For auditors, QA and senior stakeholders
Governance records, control operation evidence and supplier assurance documentation, structured for rapid retrieval under inspection pressure.
Stronger supplier posture
Explicit evidence expectations
Clear shared responsibility boundaries, oversight cadence and supplier evidence requirements, so your position is defensible regardless of what the supplier provides.

Frequently asked.

Is cybersecurity a separate workstream from validation?
Not where systems are GxP-relevant.
Cybersecurity controls are part of the assurance model rather than a parallel security-only exercise. Access governance, logging and change control overlap directly with CSV and data integrity expectations.
What do inspectors actually check around cybersecurity?
Access, privilege management, logging and evidence it's operating.
The typical focus areas are access and privilege governance, logging and monitoring, vulnerability management, and supplier assurance, with an emphasis on demonstrable operation, not policy documents alone.
Who handles the technical security work itself?
Vetted specialist technical input, directed within the GxP framework.
Deep technical execution, such as network segmentation or penetration testing, is engaged from vetted specialist input as needed, directed and integrated into the GxP governance and evidence framework rather than run as a standalone exercise.

Before the inspector
asked the question.

Based on a genuine engagement. Details are anonymised, and in some cases composited, to protect client confidentiality.

Situation

A biologics manufacturer preparing for a US FDA inspection identified that its GxP network architecture had never been formally reviewed against current cybersecurity expectations. Privileged access to multiple systems was undocumented, and backup and recovery processes had not been tested since the original system builds.

Challenge

There was no privileged access management policy and no evidence of network segmentation verification between GxP and corporate infrastructure. Backup restore testing results did not exist in documented form. These gaps, if observed during an FDA inspection, would have constituted significant findings against data integrity and system control expectations.

Approach

A GxP cybersecurity review was directed in line with the ISPE GAMP Good Practice Guide and FDA data integrity expectations, engaging vetted specialist technical input for the network segmentation assessment. Deliverables included a gap register, network segmentation assessment, a formal privileged access policy, restructured user access records and documented backup restore test evidence covering all in-scope GxP systems.

Outcome

All critical and high-priority findings were remediated before the inspection date. The FDA inspection team reviewed the cybersecurity and access management documentation and raised no observations relating to infrastructure controls, privileged access or backup and recovery.

Cybersecurity concerns
in a regulated environment?

Book a call to discuss your systems, your supplier landscape and what a proportionate control model needs to look like.

Book a Call