External exposure
Scored 90, capped at 85 because one high-priority finding is still open.
Sample deliverable
What a KernelHawk Baseline report looks like.
This report uses invented, composite observations to show the structure and the level of detail. Every number on this page is made up.
Illustrative executive view
Overall security baseline: 7.2 / 10
Several controls are working. But one open high finding, plus gaps we have evidence for, leave a path from the public internet to sensitive systems. Fix three things first: administrator logins, the exposed remote access service, and proving a restore actually works.
Five-area scorecard
How the five areas contribute to the score.
Area scores are out of 100. Here the five areas average 71.5, which is 7.4 on the 1-10 scale; the one open high-priority finding costs 0.25, so the overall score is 7.2. The full formula is in Whitepaper 02.
Identity and access
Multi-factor authentication is broadly used, but administrative roles and recovery paths have gaps in coverage.
Data protection
Sensitive data has defined storage and backup locations, with remaining gaps in third-party handling and restore evidence.
Patch and configuration
Core systems receive updates, but ownership and correction deadlines are inconsistent for public and vendor-managed services.
Detection and response
Important logs exist, but alert ownership, escalation, and a recent end-to-end recovery exercise are incomplete.
Open finding penalty and ceiling
The example includes one open high finding. It caps every area at 85 and applies a separate 0.25 overall penalty.
Priority findings
What leadership sees first.
The full technical register contains evidence and corrective detail. The executive view focuses on the decision, owner, and consequence.
| Priority | Illustrative finding | Business consequence | Recommended decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate | Administrative access lacks consistent phishing-resistant protection. | A stolen session or credential could give an attacker control over multiple business systems. | Reduce administrative roles, require stronger authentication, and review recovery paths. |
| Immediate | Remote administration is reachable more broadly than operations require. | An exposed service gives attackers a direct path to test credentials and software weaknesses. | Restrict reachability, confirm ownership, patch, and add monitored access controls. |
| Near term | Backup success is recorded, but a recent business recovery is not proven. | A disruption could last longer than expected even when backups appear healthy. | Run a documented restore exercise against an agreed recovery objective. |
| Near term | Priority findings do not have consistent owners or due dates. | Known risk can remain open because nobody owns the decision or closure evidence. | Assign owners, deadlines, and a defined retest requirement. |
Remediation roadmap
A plan organized by time and consequence.
Each action in the customer report links back to the affected finding, responsible owner, and evidence required to show closure.
Immediate: first 7 days
Restrict exposed remote access, protect administrative identities, confirm emergency contacts, and contain any condition with immediate business impact.
Owner and closure test assignedBy 30 and 60 days
Patch or replace affected systems, reduce privilege, correct unsafe cloud or application settings, and complete the agreed recovery exercise.
High-priority root causes addressedBy 90 days
Retest completed work, resolve ownership gaps, document accepted risks, update the scorecard, and choose an appropriate recurring review cadence.
Progress measured and reportedAffected system and location
The exact asset, function, account; setting, component, or path associated with the condition.
Evidence and confidence
What was observed, when it was observed, how strongly it supports the finding, and any limits on coverage.
Impact and priority
The technical consequence, business relevance, reachability, existing controls, and reason for its place in the queue.
Corrective direction
The recommended outcome, practical implementation considerations, responsible owner, and target window.
Verification requirement
The condition that must be rechecked and the evidence required to mark it fixed, mitigated, accepted, or still open.
About your systems, not this example
Get a baseline based on your actual systems and priorities.
The sample shows the report structure. A customer score exists only after written scope, authorized assessment, and review of the evidence collected for that organization.
Request an assessment