Home / Practices / Offensive Security
Penetration testing, AI model red teaming, and purple team exercises scoped to the standard that actually governs your system. Our operators test emerging attack surfaces against MITRE ATT&CK and MITRE ATLAS taxonomies.
Most penetration test reports gather dust in a folder. We map every exploit directly to the governing NIST SP 800-53 control, FedRAMP vector, or DoD CC SRG requirement it impacts, turning raw vulnerabilities into prioritized engineering tickets your team can actually fund and remediate.
Testing inside an authorized boundary requires strict operational discipline. Our cleared operators work under tight rules of engagement designed to validate controls without triggering unexpected incidents or disrupting live operations.
From model endpoints and guardrails to training weights and agent action chains, we evaluate the distinct attack surfaces within an AI pipeline. Testing ensures agentic tools cannot execute unintended actions or leak sensitive corpus data.
Traverge evaluates model endpoints, memory poisoning, corpus injection, and supply chain container layers from registry to runtime. We ensure emerging AI capabilities land inside your security posture without introducing unmonitored risk.
We measure your architecture against the capability outcomes governing federal Zero Trust programs. From identity enforcement down to MIL-STD-1553 bus policy, we test micro-segmentation controls using live adversary tactics to prove enforcement holds under attack.
Very few firms test satellite ground links, 5G cores, industrial control networks, cloud-native estates, and generative AI pipelines with the same operators. We deliver deep technical validation across advanced attack surfaces.
/practices/offensive-security/services/
Scope is set against your environment and the standard that actually governs it. Where that is a DoD Impact Level or a classified enclave, we can work there. Where it is not, we will not pretend it is.
Federal, defense and commercial
Systems with a model in the boundary
Teams with a SOC to exercise
Programs under the FY2027 mandate
/practices/offensive-security/ai/
A model endpoint is the part everyone remembers to test. The tool layer, the retrieval path and the weights themselves are where the interesting findings live.
| Surface | What gets tested |
|---|---|
| Model endpoint | Direct and indirect prompt injection, jailbreaks, guardrail bypass and system prompt extraction against the deployed configuration rather than the vendor default. |
| Agent and tool layer | Tool-call abuse, MCP server trust boundaries, memory poisoning and action chains that run further than the operator intended. |
| Retrieval path | Corpus poisoning, embedding inversion and cross-tenant leakage out of the vector store feeding your RAG pipeline. |
| Supply chain | Weights and container layers in transit from registry to runtime, and whether your integrity controls catch a substituted artifact before it ever reaches inference. This is where a backdoored model gets in. |
| The model itself | Extraction through query patterns and membership inference against training data, where the weights are the asset worth protecting. |
/practices/offensive-security/engagement/
Offensive testing inside an authorization boundary carries real risk to a live ATO. These are the controls we run the engagement under, not the ones we test.
Next step
It starts with a gap analysis at no cost, and a scoped proposal follows.
