EresusSecurity
Incident Response

Preserve evidence and close the attack path during a crisis.

Eresus supports security incidents with initial triage, attack-surface analysis, cloud and identity review, containment guidance, and post-incident hardening plans.

Book a security briefingAll services
Best fit

This engagement creates value fastest for teams like these.

Security and engineering leadership

Teams that need exploit-backed proof before they reprioritize application, API, cloud, or identity work.

Product teams with customer-facing risk

Organizations shipping auth-heavy, multi-tenant, regulated, or internet-exposed systems where logic and authorization flaws matter.

Buyers who need proof, not alert volume

Programs that want reproducible findings, remediation direction, and a closure path instead of scanner noise.

Scope

Initial triage and incident scoping
Log, cloud, identity, and endpoint signal review
Containment and eradication guidance
Post-incident hardening and retest

Risk signals

Attacker persistence remains active
Evidence loss from unsafe containment
Cloud/IAM pivot goes unnoticed
Root cause is exploited again

Outcomes

Incident scope and impact summary
Attack-path and root-cause analysis
Containment/hardening action list
Readiness plan for the next event
Engagement model

Not scanner output. Offensive work that produces proof.

01

Scope and objective

We align assets, workflows, user roles, testing windows, and safe operating boundaries before execution starts.

02

Expert validation

Eresus analysts validate exploitability and business impact instead of forwarding automated scanner output.

03

Proof, fix, retest

Each finding ships with evidence, impact, remediation guidance, and retest steps so teams can close risk quickly.

FAQ

The questions buyers want answered early.

How do you scope this engagement?+
We start from assets, business workflows, authorization boundaries, and the attack paths that could create material risk. Scope is shaped around exploitability, not checklist volume.
How are pricing and engagement models structured?+
Pricing is transparent and based on asset surface, API complexity, role hierarchies, and environment constraints. We offer fixed-scope project audits as well as recurring validation retainers for continuous deployment pipelines.
What is the typical test duration and delivery timeline?+
Standard web and API assessments take between 5 to 15 business days depending on scope. Critical zero-day vulnerabilities are communicated immediately via encrypted channels during active testing rather than waiting for report finalization.
What deliverables and report formats do we receive?+
You receive an executive summary for leadership, reproducible PoC exploit chains with raw HTTP requests, CVSS v3.1 scoring, developer-ready remediation code snippets, and a formal compliance attestation letter.
Is retesting included to verify our security fixes?+
Yes. Every engagement includes a complimentary retest window within 30 days of report delivery to validate that fixes have been properly implemented without introducing regression flaws.
Do your reports satisfy DORA, NIS2, SOC 2, and KVKK requirements?+
Yes. Our testing methodology follows OWASP Top 10, PTES, and NIST SP 800-115 standards, providing the technical evidence and methodology documentation required by auditors for DORA Article 25, NIS2 Article 21, SOC 2 Type II, and KVKK technical measures.

We tie risk to business impact.

Findings do not stop at severity labels. We explain which customer workflow, data class, or operational objective is affected.

Deliverables work for engineers and executives.

Engineering teams get reproducible proof and remediation direction; leadership gets the risk narrative, priority, and closure status.

Related proof

Research and advisories that support this service motion.

Research

Perseus Android Banking Malware: Accessibility Abuse and Notes-App Theft

What the Perseus Android banking trojan does with Accessibility Services, why note-taking apps are a target, and how users and enterprises can contain the risk.

Research

Cloud Security: AWS IAM Flaws and One-Click Privilege Escalation

Why do 80% of organizations using Cloud Computing (AWS, Azure) suffer massive breaches strictly through misconfigured Identity and Access Management...

Research

The Limitations of WAF: Why Firewalls Alone Can't Prevent Hacks

Your company relies on a pricey WAF (Web Application Firewall) to block threats. But why is a WAF completely blind to logical flaws? Discover how manual...

Advisory

ERESUS-ADV-2026-002: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via Cloud Metadata Endpoints

Server-side request forgery in cloud-hosted URL fetch flows can expose metadata services, temporary IAM credentials, and internal configuration.

Advisory

Critical Authentication Bypass via JWT Signature Verification Disabled in yargi-mcp

yargi-mcp decodes Clerk JWT tokens with signature verification disabled, enabling authentication bypass, forged identities, and arbitrary scope escalation.

Advisory

Zero-Day Analysis: Authenticated SSRF in n8n-mcp (GHSA-4ggg-h7ph-26qr)

Authenticated SSRF in n8n-mcp multi-tenant HTTP mode allows attackers with a valid token to force server-side requests to internal and cloud metadata resources.

Next step

Let’s scope this work against the surface that matters most.

Whether this starts as a pilot, a single application, a critical API, an AI agent flow, or a wider program, we start from the highest-impact surface.

Book a security briefingRequest a scope review