Citation-mapped GLBA, HIPAA, and SOC 2 readiness for banks and healthcare organizations that can't afford "probably compliant." Every finding traces to a real regulation — never AI-guessed.
Each program is scoped to specific regulatory exposure — not a generic security checklist applied to everyone.
Institutions preparing for an FFIEC exam cycle who need GLBA Safeguards Rule evidence they can hand an examiner directly.
Companies handling nonpublic personal information under GLBA's financial-institution definition, not just traditional banks.
Organizations maintaining ePHI who need HIPAA Security Rule technical-safeguard evidence ahead of an OCR inquiry.
Entities with HITRUST validated-assessment ambitions who need a readiness baseline before the real audit.
Vendors whose enterprise customers require a SOC 2 report before they'll sign — readiness before you engage a CPA firm.
Digital-health and fintech platforms needing both a HIPAA/GLBA posture and a SOC 2 report for the same enterprise buyers.
Each assessment is built from your actual infrastructure configuration — not a questionnaire, not a template. Findings are mapped to the specific regulatory citation they violate.
Full technical-safeguard assessment against the Safeguards Rule, with FFIEC CAT-aligned maturity scoring and examination-ready evidence.
Security Rule technical-safeguard assessment with HITRUST-aligned scoring, built for OCR inquiry and HITRUST validated-assessment prep.
Common Criteria readiness assessment ahead of your actual audit engagement — the gap analysis a CPA firm's Type II audit assumes you've already done.
A one-page governance-level summary, separate from the technical report — built for a board packet, not an engineer.
Every finding gets a citation, an owner, and a target date based on severity — not a generic checklist.
Re-assessments are compared automatically: what's resolved, what's new, what's exceeded its own remediation window.
GLBA, HIPAA, and SOC 2 all run on the same citation-mapping engine — one standard of evidence across three regulatory regimes, not three vendors with three different methodologies.
Findings are computed across AWS, Azure, and GCP configuration in the same engagement — most assessments only look at one cloud at a time.
A control maturity scorecard, control testing notes with methodology and population per citation, a complete evidence appendix, and an examiner-ready package manifest — not a findings summary.
Every finding carries a citation, a severity-based target window, and named ownership — a corrective action plan an institution can actually execute against.
Re-assessments are compared against prior runs automatically. The evidentiary record gets more valuable the longer it's maintained — not a snapshot that's obsolete the day it's delivered.
Every engagement produces both a full technical readiness report and a standalone board briefing — built for two different readers, from the same underlying evidence.
Findings are computed, not guessed. The only place a language model touches your report is the narrative framing on top of numbers that were already fixed before it ran.
Every deficiency maps to a specific regulatory citation — 16 CFR 314.4(c)(5), 45 CFR 164.312(b) — computed from your declared configuration.
CMM-style maturity ratings are calculated from finding severity and density — reproducible, not a model's impression.
Executive and board narrative is drafted locally around findings that already exist. The language model never originates a finding.
Each re-assessment is compared against your last one automatically — an evidence trail that gets more valuable every quarter, not a one-off snapshot.
Every finding in every report cites the exact regulatory section it relates to. If we can't map it to a citation, we say so — we don't pad the report to look thorough.
180 days, one delivery — not a drip of milestone invoices for a program that could have shipped sooner. Deposit secures the engagement, balance due on delivery.
We tell you exactly what this assessment does and doesn't cover — including what still requires your Qualified Individual, your counsel, or a licensed CPA firm.
Founded by a defense-sector analyst who brought the same evidentiary rigor DoD contractors are held to into banking and healthcare compliance.
SHIELD Protocol LLC began in defense contracting — building CMMC and NIST SP 800-171 readiness for the defense industrial base, where a single missed control can end a contract relationship. That's a specific kind of rigor: findings that cite exact controls, evidence that survives a real audit, and no room for "probably fine."
Banks and hospitals get examined too. They deserve the same standard of evidence — not a generic scan with a compliance label on it.
The commercial line applies that same discipline to GLBA, HIPAA, and SOC 2 engagements: deterministic findings, real citations, and reports built to be read by an examiner, a board, and outside counsel — not just an IT team.
Illustrative excerpts from a sample engagement — not real client data. Every real report is built from your actual infrastructure configuration.
Requirement: Authentication of users prior to access to customer information systems
"The Board should be apprised that the institution's current control maturity score is 2.1 of 5.0, reflecting critical gaps in access control and audit logging that warrant prioritized remediation before the next examination cycle..."
50% deposit secures the engagement. Balance due NET 15 on delivery of the completed readiness package — not staged across milestones.
Medical device cybersecurity review (IEC 62304 / ISO 14971) and ISO 27001 certification readiness are available only via separate engagement or referral partner. Penetration testing, social engineering testing, and physical security assessment are out of scope for both programs. Confirming that your Qualified Individual (GLBA) or Privacy/Security Officer (HIPAA) role is staffed remains your organization's responsibility.
Tell us about your environment and compliance timeline. We respond within one business day.