Breach and Attack Simulation Services That Prove Whether Your Defences Actually Work
Your firewalls, EDR, SIEM, and SOC exist to stop attacks. BAS tells you if they actually do. Human-led control validation with results mapped to PCI DSS, ISO 27001, and SEBI CSCRF.
Trusted by India's leading enterprises
Three different questions
BAS, penetration testing and red teaming answer different things
They are routinely sold as alternatives. They are not, and buying the wrong one produces a report that answers a question you did not have.
| Exercise | The question it answers | What it produces |
|---|---|---|
| Penetration testing | Can this system be broken into, and how? | Findings in the system, with reproduction steps and fixes |
| Breach and attack simulation | Do the controls we already bought actually detect and stop known techniques? | A control-by-control verdict: blocked, alerted, logged silently, or missed entirely |
| Red teaming | Can a determined adversary reach a defined objective without us noticing? | A narrative of one path, and what the defenders saw at each step |
- The question it answers
- Can this system be broken into, and how?
- What it produces
- Findings in the system, with reproduction steps and fixes
Breach and attack simulation
- The question it answers
- Do the controls we already bought actually detect and stop known techniques?
- What it produces
- A control-by-control verdict: blocked, alerted, logged silently, or missed entirely
- The question it answers
- Can a determined adversary reach a defined objective without us noticing?
- What it produces
- A narrative of one path, and what the defenders saw at each step
What gets validated
The stack you have already paid for
Endpoint detection and response
Whether the agent detects the technique, whether it blocks or only alerts, and whether the alert reaches anyone. Deployed coverage is checked too, because the gap is often a subset of hosts without the agent at all.
Detection rules and alerting
Whether the event was recorded, whether a rule fired, and whether anything downstream acted. Logged silently is the most common and most dangerous outcome: the evidence exists and nobody was told.
Network and perimeter controls
Firewalls, intrusion prevention, web application firewalls and segmentation, tested against the techniques that cross them.
Email and web gateways
Delivery of the payload types and lures that actually arrive, testing the control and not the user.
Identity and directory defences
Whether the techniques used against directory services and privileged accounts are detected before they succeed.
Data loss controls
Whether an exfiltration path is noticed, which is the question an incident makes urgent and nobody asks beforehand.
Reading the result
Four verdicts, and the middle two are why this is worth doing
| State | What it means | What follows |
|---|---|---|
| Blocked | The control prevented the technique from executing. | What you paid for. Worth confirming, because a control assumed to block and merely alerting is a different security posture from the one on the architecture diagram. |
| Alerted | The technique executed and an alert reached a human who could act. | An acceptable outcome when detection is the design. It becomes a problem when the same technique was believed to be prevented. |
| Logged silently | The event was recorded and no rule fired, so nobody was told. | The single most valuable finding a simulation produces. The evidence existed and the organisation learned nothing from it, which is exactly what a real intrusion looks like from the inside. |
| Missed | No prevention, no alert, no record. | A blind spot, and the honest version of the coverage map. Often a licensing gap, an agent that was never deployed, or a rule disabled during a past false-positive storm. |
- Working as intended
- Check it matches the design
- Why the exercise pays for itself
Where it fits in compliance
Useful evidence, and stated accurately
Control validation produces evidence that is genuinely useful in a compliance conversation: a documented, dated statement of whether specific controls detect and stop specific techniques, mapped to the control requirements of PCI DSS, ISO 27001 and SEBI CSCRF. It is worth being precise about the SEBI position, because it changed and a great deal of vendor copy has not caught up. CSCRF guideline DE.CM.S3 3.c originally read that regulated entities shall deploy solutions such as BAS, CART, decoy and vulnerability management. The technical clarifications of 28 August 2025 restated it: it is recommended that regulated entities consider deploying a range of security solutions in consultation with their IT Committee, such as threat simulation, vulnerability management and decoy systems. The acronyms were dropped from the instrument and the obligation was softened to a recommendation. We run this capability and think it earns its place on merit, and a buyer should know they are choosing it. If a vendor tells you the framework makes it compulsory, ask which clause, and then read the clarification of 28 August 2025.
Methodology
What happens between kickoff and the report
Every engagement follows this process through Lemon, our proprietary audit management platform.
Threat Landscape and Scope Definition
We work with your security leadership to identify the most relevant threat scenarios for your industry, regulatory obligations, and technology stack. Scope is defined across control categories, and success criteria are established upfront. ShadowMap provides immediate external attack surface visibility to inform scenario design.
Control Inventory and Baseline
We document your entire defensive stack including network controls, endpoint agents, SIEM rules, DLP policies, email gateways, and SOC procedures. This baseline ensures simulations are designed to test specific control behaviours, not just generic attack vectors.
Attack Scenario Design
Senior consultants design multi-stage attack chains that mirror real threat actor behaviour relevant to your organisation. Scenarios cover initial access, execution, persistence, privilege escalation, lateral movement, collection, exfiltration, and impact. Each scenario is mapped to specific controls it should trigger.
Controlled Attack Execution
Our team executes simulations in a controlled, coordinated manner using a combination of proprietary frameworks and manual attacker tradecraft. Simulations run across the full kill chain with careful monitoring to ensure no unintended business disruption. Lemon tracks every test case, artefact, and outcome in real time.
Human-Led Analysis and Interpretation
This is where Security Brigade fundamentally differs from tool-only BAS. Every simulation result is analysed by a senior security consultant who interprets why a control failed, what an attacker would do with that gap, and how to fix it. Raw pass/fail data is transformed into actionable intelligence with business context.
Compliance Mapping and Reporting
Findings are mapped to PCI DSS, ISO 27001, and SEBI CSCRF control requirements. Reports are delivered in multiple formats for technical teams, security leadership, and board-level stakeholders. Every finding includes specific remediation guidance, not generic recommendations.
Retest and Validation
After your team remediates findings, we retest affected controls to confirm fixes are effective. Lemon tracks the complete vulnerability lifecycle from initial finding through remediation to validated closure, providing auditable evidence for compliance reviews.
"We swap auditors every two years as policy. Security Brigade is the only firm we've kept continuously since 2016. The difference is Lemon — every engagement follows the same methodology, every finding gets three-layer review, and our RBI auditors have never questioned a report. That kind of consistency across 300+ annual assessments is rare."
FAQ
Breach and attack simulation, answered
What it validates and where it fits. Talk to our team about your control stack.
Contact usIs breach and attack simulation required for SEBI CSCRF compliance?
How is this different from a penetration test?
What is the most common finding?
Will this generate alerts and disrupt our operations?
How often should we run it?
Stay protected between assessments with ShadowMap
Continuous attack surface monitoring: it discovers new assets, detects credential leaks, and alerts on new exposures the day they appear.
Find Out If Your Security Controls Actually Work
Request a scoping call to discuss breach and attack simulation for your environment. Our team will help you define the right scope, attack scenarios, and compliance mapping for your organisation.
Typically responds within 1 business day · No commitment required
The platform underneath
Every engagement runs on B-52.
Simulation answers whether a control fires, and the answer decays the moment anything changes. Running it on a cadence instead of on a calendar invitation is what the platform is for.