Questions to ask before buying a security review
Compare security review proposals by scope, evidence, data handling, remediation, and retest. Avoid buying a report that cannot answer your decision.
Choose a security review that can answer your team's decision, not merely produce a long report. Before comparing proposals, state what you need to know: whether customer boundaries hold, whether an AI tool can exceed its permissions, or whether a release has a specific exposure.
Then ask each provider how it will collect and challenge evidence for that question. This is a proposed comparison worksheet. Use it to compare the scope, evidence, and follow-up each provider offers.
Which questions expose important differences?
| Ask | A useful answer includes |
|---|---|
| What exactly will you review? | Assets, roles, workflows, exclusions, and versions |
| Who will review the work? | Named responsibilities and relevant qualifications |
| How do you handle uncertain findings? | Evidence states and an escalation process |
| What data leaves our environment? | Tools, providers, recipients, and retention terms |
| What will engineering receive? | Reproducible evidence and practical remediation |
| Is a retest included? | Scope, timing, limits, and acceptance criteria |
| What happens if access is blocked? | A clear coverage limitation, not an invented result |
| What is the price based on? | Defined deliverables and change conditions |
Ask for a redacted sample report when the provider can share one. Examine whether it connects observations to impact and fixes. A polished cover is less useful than a finding an engineer can reproduce within the approved environment.
How should you compare automation claims?
Ask what the automation actually does and what a human checks. A tool that reads code, a scanner that sends requests, and a model that summarizes results are different components. The provider should explain their permissions and failure handling.
Do not accept “AI-powered” as evidence of coverage or accuracy. Ask how unsupported conclusions are rejected, what happens when the model is unavailable, and who approves a finding before delivery.
The OWASP testing framework can help structure a testing program. Referencing OWASP does not itself establish provider certification or prove that every relevant control is included.
What should you resolve before signing?
Confirm the deliverables, data terms, permitted methods, stop conditions, and ownership of follow-up work. Make exclusions visible. A lower price may reflect a narrower review; a higher price may include work you do not need.
For a fictional team that needs evidence on tenant exports before a buyer review, a scoped Sourced Security review may fit: ask for the exact roles, export paths, report evidence, price, schedule, and retest terms. Sourced Access does not fit a need for a deployed secrets vault; it is a separate pilot with no production-readiness claim. Record either fit decision and the unanswered proposal fields before buying. A sample finding describes report format, not a prior customer result.
Discuss your application with Sourced to define the review question and the evidence your team needs. Pricing and testing terms are agreed for the actual scope.
Know what you will get from a review
Explore an illustrative finding with evidence, a proposed fix and retest criteria. Discuss your systems, review questions and deadline when you are ready.