Solutions › SIRI Attack
SIRI Attack — see your organisation the way an attacker actually would.
A checklist scan tells you what's patched. It doesn't tell you what's exploitable. SIRI Attack runs penetration testing, red teaming and continuous validation the way real adversaries operate — across network, web, API, cloud, mobile and people.
56%+Organisations increasing red-team investment year over year
62%Of breaches involve the human element — phishing, credential theft, error
70%+Moving from annual point-in-time scans to continuous testing (PTaaS)
Why point-in-time testing is no longer enough
Live tracking · scroll to see the shift toward continuous validation
Shifting model
PTaaS
Over 70% of organisations are moving from annual penetration tests to continuous, PTaaS-style testing as release cycles now outpace a once-a-year assessment window.
Rising spend
56%+
More than half of organisations increased red-team investment as boards ask not just “are we compliant” but “could we actually be breached.”
Human element
62%
62% of breaches involve the human element — phishing, credential theft, social engineering or error — leaving the largest attack vector untested by technical scanning alone.
Supply chain
48%
48% of breaches involve suppliers, vendors or trusted third parties — attack-surface assessment increasingly has to extend past an organisation's own infrastructure.
Standardising
MITRE ATT&CK
MITRE ATT&CK has become the common language for scoping and reporting offensive engagements, making findings comparable across vendors and over time.
Compliance testing and real testing are not the same thing
A clean pentest report and an unexploitable environment are two different claims.
Most penetration tests are scoped to satisfy an auditor, not to find what a determined attacker would. SIRI Attack is built the other way around: engineers who test systems the way they're actually attacked, reporting on exploitable paths to business impact — not a list of CVEs sorted by CVSS score.
Automated scanning finds known vulnerabilities in isolation. A real intrusion rarely uses one vulnerability — it chains a handful of individually low-severity weaknesses into a path from an exposed login page to a domain administrator account, or from a forgotten staging server to a production database. That chaining is what a scanner cannot do and a report full of unranked findings does not communicate.
$4.44M — the global average cost of a data breach
The gap between what a breach costs and what continuous offensive testing costs is the argument for treating this as an operating discipline, not an annual exercise. (2026 industry breach-cost benchmarks.)
SIRI Attack's engineers hold current offensive-security certifications and report findings the way they were found: as a chain of exploitable steps to an outcome a board would recognise, mapped to MITRE ATT&CK and the OWASP Top 10. Where a finding is severe enough to warrant it, testing escalates directly into SIRI MDR (to check whether it would have been detected) and SIRI Response (if it already has been exploited).
What organisations get wrong
Four assumptions that leave real exposure untested
Most testing gaps aren't about missing tools — they're about what the testing was actually scoped to find.
01 — SCOPE
“We passed our last pentest”
A clean report from a narrowly scoped test says nothing about what sits outside that scope — most real intrusions start somewhere the test never touched.
02 — FREQUENCY
“We test once a year”
Annual testing checks a single point in time; infrastructure, code and cloud configuration change continuously in between, and so does what's exploitable.
03 — DEPTH
“Vulnerability scanning is basically a pentest”
Automated scanning finds known vulnerabilities; it doesn't chain weaknesses together the way a human attacker does to reach real business impact.
04 — PEOPLE
“Our technical controls are strong, so we're covered”
62% of breaches involve the human element — testing that never touches phishing or social engineering leaves the largest single vector unmeasured.
What SIRI Attack covers
Offensive testing across every layer an attacker actually uses
Scoped to your environment, reported as exploitable chains, and mapped to MITRE ATT&CK and OWASP throughout.
PENETRATION TESTING
Network, Web & Infrastructure
Network, web application and infrastructure penetration testing against real exploitation paths, not just known-CVE matching.
- External & internal network testing
- Business-logic & OWASP Top 10 coverage
- Exploitation, not just detection
RED TEAMING
Full-Scope Adversary Simulation
Physical, digital and human-vector adversary simulation against a defined objective, run the way a real campaign would be.
- Objective-based, not checklist-based
- Physical, digital & human vectors
- Mapped to MITRE ATT&CK
APPLICATION SECURITY
Web, API & Mobile Security
Application and API-layer testing against the OWASP Top 10 and business-logic flaws automated scanners miss, plus iOS and Android assessment.
- OWASP Top 10 & business logic
- REST/GraphQL API testing
- iOS & Android app assessment
CLOUD SECURITY
AWS, Azure & GCP
Configuration and attack-path assessment across cloud environments, where the majority of current exploitation actually happens.
- IAM & privilege-escalation paths
- Misconfiguration assessment
- Multi-cloud & hybrid coverage
SOCIAL ENGINEERING
Phishing, Vishing & Pretexting
Simulated phishing, vishing and pretexting campaigns that test the human element directly, with awareness follow-through.
- Phishing & vishing simulation
- Physical pretexting
- Awareness debrief & metrics
ATTACK SURFACE ASSESSMENT
Mapping What's Actually Exposed
Mapping and prioritising every externally exposed asset before testing begins, so effort goes where real risk sits.
- External asset discovery
- Business-impact prioritisation
- Feeds directly into SIRI Exposure
Evidence, not guesswork
No testing vs. annual compliance scan vs. SIRI Attack — what actually differs
Buying a scan and running an offensive testing programme are different undertakings.
| Approach | No dedicated testing | Annual compliance scan | SIRI Attack |
|---|---|---|---|
| Testing cadence | Ad hoc or none | Once a year | Continuous / PTaaS |
| Human-element testing (phishing, social eng.) | No | Rare | Included |
| Cloud & API-specific testing | No | Depends on scope | Included |
| Findings mapped to MITRE ATT&CK | No | Rare | Yes |
| Escalation into detection & response | No defined path | No defined path | Direct handoff to SIRI MDR / SIRI Response |
Sources: 2026 industry red-team and penetration-testing benchmark compilations; MITRE ATT&CK. Summarised for comparison; confirm current scope needs for your environment.
Numbers every board should know
What offensive testing is actually finding
56%+
Increased red-team spend
Organisations raising investment in offensive testing year over year.
62%
Breaches involve people
Phishing, credential theft, social engineering or error — the vector technical scanning alone doesn't test.
$4.44M
Average breach cost
Global average cost of a data breach, before factoring in regulatory and reputational impact.
31%
Breaches via exploitation
Of confirmed breaches involved direct vulnerability exploitation as the initial access vector.
Compliance alignment
Standards & frameworks we align to
Our methodology is built around publicly recognised frameworks — not a proprietary checklist. Where a specific certification or attestation is completed and verified, it will be named here explicitly.
ISO/IEC 27001:2022
SOC 2 (AICPA TSC)
NIST CSF 2.0
MITRE ATT&CK
OWASP Top 10
OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications
NIST AI RMF
ISO/IEC 42001
ISO 22301
CERT-In Directions 2022
Framework references reflect publicly available versions as of publication and describe the standards our methodology is aligned to; they are not a claim of certification, attestation, or audit completion unless stated explicitly elsewhere on this site.
Why SIRI for offensive security specifically
Testing built to find what matters, not to fill a report template
The team that finds the exploitable path is the same team that can tell you whether it would have been detected.
01
Offensive by design
Every engagement starts from how a system can actually be compromised, not from a compliance checklist worked backwards.
02
Technical depth
Findings come from engineers who do the testing directly, not account managers relaying a subcontractor's report three steps removed.
03
Mapped to real frameworks
Results are reported against MITRE ATT&CK and the OWASP Top 10, so findings are comparable across engagements and over time.
04
From discovery to response
Attack-surface discovery, offensive testing, detection and incident response run as one connected capability through SIRI Exposure, SIRI MDR and SIRI Response — not separate vendors handed off between.
Who this is built for
Organisations SIRI Attack is built for
Financial Services
Technology & SaaS
Healthcare
Critical Infrastructure & Energy
Government
Startups preparing for SOC 2 / ISO 27001
How we work
From scoping to continuous validation
01
Scoping & Rules of Engagement
Defining objectives, boundaries and rules of engagement against your actual environment.
Week 102
Testing & Exploitation
Manual testing and exploitation across the agreed scope, tracked as it's found.
Weeks 2–303
Reporting & Debrief
Findings reported as exploitable chains to business impact, walked through with your team.
Week 404
Retesting & Continuous Validation
Fix verification and, where scoped, ongoing continuous testing rather than a once-a-year repeat.
OngoingFrequently asked
SIRI Attack, answered directly
Is this a vulnerability scan or a real penetration test?
A real penetration test. Automated scanning is one input, not the deliverable — SIRI Attack's engineers manually exploit and chain findings the way an actual attacker would, and report on what's exploitable, not just what's unpatched.
Do you test production environments?
This is scoped with you directly. Many engagements test production with agreed safeguards; where the risk of disruption is too high, testing runs against a representative staging environment instead.
How is red teaming different from penetration testing?
A penetration test is scoped to find as many exploitable issues as possible within a defined boundary. A red-team engagement is scoped to a specific objective — such as reaching a sensitive data store — without your defensive team knowing in advance, testing detection and response as much as the initial compromise.
What happens if you find something critical mid-engagement?
Critical findings with active real-world risk are escalated to you immediately, not held for the final report. Where relevant, this can hand off directly into SIRI Response if there's evidence the issue has already been exploited.
Can results be used as evidence for ISO 27001 or SOC 2?
Yes. Reports are structured to serve as audit evidence for control testing under ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and SOC 2 (AICPA Trust Services Criteria), in addition to standing on their own as a technical record.
Find out what's actually exploitable
See your organisation through an attacker's eyes.
Start with a scoped engagement, or move to continuous testing if you already know your cadence needs to change.
24/7 for active incidents: +91 79819 12046
Related