Threat Modeling
Model the threats before they find you.
STRIDE
PASTA
LINDDUN
DREAD / CVSS
MITRE ATT&CK
Threat modeling is a structured, framework-driven analysis of what can go wrong in a system, a process, or, for high-profile individuals, a person’s operating environment. It produces a prioritised, defensible answer to three questions: what are the realistic threats, what would they exploit, and what should be done about it.
Threat Modeling
Identify attack surfaces, trust boundaries, and potential abuse scenarios before systems scale.
Risk mapping
The Challenge
A defence not built against a specific threat is a defence built on assumption.
Most security incidents are not novel. They are predictable consequences of threats that were never explicitly modelled, never matched against a specific countermeasure, and never validated against the system as it actually operates. Without a structured threat model, organisations default to defending against what they have seen before — not against what their adversary can plausibly do next.
The cost is rarely visible until it is too late. The application hardened against the OWASP Top 10 that failed against business-logic abuse no scanner could find. The executive whose corporate email was protected by every modern control while their personal device was left at defaults. The privacy exposure no security review caught because the controls were tuned to confidentiality, not to linkability.
Threat modeling closes that gap by forcing the question upstream: what could actually go wrong here, who would make it go wrong, and what would they exploit?
“From an assumed defence
to a defensible one.”
Countermeasures matched to specific threats, not drawn from a generic checklist.
Two Engagement Contexts
Organisational & High-Profile Individual
Organisational threat modeling for applications, infrastructure, cloud platforms, and business processes, and a separate individual engagement for executives, board members, and public figures whose threat surface is personal as well as professional.
Output
Threat Register · Countermeasure Plan · Device Hardening
A documented threat register and a countermeasure plan ranked by likelihood and impact. For individual engagements, a hardened set of personal devices configured against the threats that actually apply to the principal.
What We Model
Six engagement areas. Framework selected against the threat, not the calendar.
The engagement is anchored in the threat-modeling frameworks the security industry actually relies on, selected against the nature of each engagement rather than applied by default to every scenario.
Application & System Threat Modeling
STRIDE-driven analysis of web applications, APIs, mobile applications, microservice architectures, and cloud-native deployments, at design time where possible, against the running system where necessary. Every threat tied to a component or data flow, not stated in the abstract.
Infrastructure & Cloud Threat Modeling
Trust-boundary analysis of network architectures, identity and access topologies, hybrid and multi-cloud environments, and operational technology where in scope. Assumptions made explicit, attack paths mapped before they become incidents.
Business-Logic & Process Threat Modeling
PASTA-driven analysis of workflows where the threats are not purely technical but procedural, payment flows, onboarding, privileged-access processes, M&A integration, and any flow where business logic itself is the attack surface.
Privacy Threat Modeling
LINDDUN-driven analysis of data-handling flows for organisations operating under GDPR, sector privacy regimes, or contractual privacy obligations, surfacing threats of linkability, identifiability, and disclosure that confidentiality-only models miss entirely.
High-Profile Individual Threat Modeling
A different category of engagement for executives, board members, public figures, and family-office principals whose exposure is personal as well as professional. Threats modeled include targeted phishing and impersonation, surveillance, OSINT-driven reconnaissance, device compromise, and the exploitation of family or staff as indirect attack vectors.
Device Hardening, HPI Engagement Extension
Where the individual threat model identifies device-level exposure as a meaningful vector, we extend the engagement to the hardening and configuration of the principal’s devices, mobile phones, laptops, communications tools, and home and travel network configurations — implemented against the specific threats the model surfaced. Offered only for named, in-scope individuals. Not an organisation-wide fleet or MDM service.
Frameworks Selected Against the Engagement
Each framework applied where it fits, not by default.
Across every framework, the engagement follows the same disciplined sequence: decompose the system or environment into its real components, data flows, and trust boundaries, typically expressed as data flow diagrams. Identify threats systematically against each element rather than ad hoc. Propose countermeasures matched specifically to each identified threat rather than drawn from a generic checklist. Prioritise and validate the resulting set against the engineering or operational reality of the environment.
A threat model that does not reflect the system as it actually operates is a model of something else. Every engagement is grounded in the real architecture, not the documented one.
STRIDE – Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege. System-oriented threat identification mapped to components and data flows.
PASTA – Process for Attack Simulation and Threat Analysis. Seven-stage, risk-centric, business-aligned modelling that connects technical threats to business objectives.
LINDDUN – Privacy-focused threat modelling across Linkability, Identifiability, Non-repudiation, Detectability, Disclosure, Unawareness, and Non-compliance.
DREAD & CVSS – Severity scoring and prioritisation frameworks applied to surface threats, directing countermeasure investment where it actually reduces risk.
MITRE ATT&CK · NIST SP 800-154 – Adversary tactics and techniques reference and data-centric threat modelling guide, applied across engagement types.
What You Gain
A defence built against the threats that actually apply.
Threat modeling done properly replaces assumption with structured, prioritised understanding, and produces countermeasures that trace back to specific identified threats, not to a generic security baseline.
Upstream Clarity
Threats identified and addressed before systems go live, not discovered after an incident reveals the assumption that was never tested.
Prioritised Countermeasures
Every mitigation traces back to a specific identified threat, ranked by likelihood and impact. No generic checklist. No security investment directed at threats you do not actually face.
Privacy-Complete Coverage
LINDDUN-driven privacy threat analysis that catches linkability and identifiability risks that confidentiality-only security models miss, critical for GDPR and data-handling obligations.
Protection for Individuals at Risk
A threat model built for the specific exposure of executives, board members, and public figures, covering digital, OSINT, surveillance, and the human attack vectors that generic corporate security policies do not address.
Defensible Architecture
Systems and processes designed with explicit, documented trust boundaries, so design reviews, audits, and incident investigations start from a model that reflects operational reality.
Complete the Picture
Pair threat modeling with our other security services.
Threat modeling identifies what needs defending. Penetration testing proves whether the defence holds under real-world attack. IT Audit verifies the control environment that should be stopping both.
Ready to Begin
Let's build a threat model grounded in your actual environment.
Send us your scope and objectives, whether that is an application, an infrastructure estate, a business process, or a specific individual. We’ll return a proportionate plan and fixed fee within 48 hours.