Each engagement type is designed for a specific aspect of the supply chain. Some clients engage with one. Others combine several into a phased program of work.
Full inventory and risk analysis of all third-party packages in your codebase
A dependency audit begins with enumeration. Before anything can be assessed for risk, it must first be known. We generate a complete inventory of every package your codebase depends on, including packages that your direct dependencies depend on in turn.
This transitive layer is where many organizations have the least visibility. A project might declare forty direct dependencies but run with several hundred packages in its resolved dependency graph. Each of those packages has a maintenance history, a vulnerability record, and a set of permissions and behaviors that warrant examination.
The audit produces a prioritized set of findings organized around risk categories: security vulnerabilities with associated CVE references, maintenance risk indicators such as abandoned packages or infrequent release cadence, license compliance observations, and version drift where components are running significantly behind their current stable release.
Deliverables include a Software Bill of Materials in a standard machine-readable format, a findings report ranked by estimated impact, and a remediation roadmap organized by effort level.
Security and reliability examination of your external API connections and service dependencies
External integrations are a distinct category of supply chain risk. A package dependency is code your team controls at build time. An API integration is a runtime dependency on an external system, operated by another organization, whose reliability and security posture you do not control.
Integration reviews examine how your application connects to external services, what data flows across those connections, how authentication is handled, and what your application does when those services are unavailable or return unexpected responses.
Common findings include integrations that transmit sensitive data to third-party analytics services, payment integrations that lack proper fallback handling, and authentication flows that rely on deprecated endpoints in identity provider APIs. None of these are unusual. They accumulate naturally as products grow.
The output of an integration review is a map of all active integrations with findings for each, prioritized by the sensitivity of the data involved and the criticality of the integration to your application's core function.
A periodic review cadence for teams that ship regularly and want to maintain supply chain visibility over time
A single audit provides a point-in-time picture. For teams shipping continuously, the supply chain changes with every deployment. New packages are introduced. Dependencies are updated. Integrations are added or modified. The picture from six months ago may not reflect today's reality.
Ongoing monitoring engagements establish a regular review cadence — typically quarterly or monthly — with a defined scope matched to the pace of change in your codebase. Each cycle produces an updated inventory, a comparison against the previous review, and a prioritized set of new findings.
This cadence also allows us to track whether findings from previous cycles have been addressed, which packages are accumulating maintenance risk over time, and whether any integrations have introduced new data flows since the last review.
Hands-on advisory during the process of addressing findings from a completed audit
Audit reports answer the question of what exists and where the risks are. Remediation answers the question of what to do about it. These are separate problems, and teams sometimes find that the second is harder than the first.
Remediation support engagements pair our consultants with your engineering team during the process of addressing findings. We help interpret the significance of specific findings in your particular context, advise on sequencing when multiple items compete for attention, evaluate alternative packages where a current dependency needs to be replaced, and provide guidance on redesigning integrations that have structural security gaps.
At the end of a remediation engagement, we conduct a verification review — comparing the current state of the dependency graph and integrations against the original findings to confirm which items have been resolved and identify any that remain open.
Contact us to describe what you're working with. We can help identify which engagement type or combination makes sense for your codebase, team size, and timeline.