Wireless Infrastructure Attack Assessment
Advanced wireless security testing including WiFi, Bluetooth, RF, and cellular network attack simulation and vulnerability assessment.
In scope
- WiFi network penetration testing
- Bluetooth security assessment
- RF protocol analysis
- Cellular network security testing
- Wireless IoT device evaluation
You receive
- Wireless vulnerability report
- Attack scenario documentation
- Security control recommendations
- Encryption assessment results
- Protocol security analysis
Tiers
Choose the depth.
Entry — market-sized scope
$10K
Single-office WiFi assessment: up to 5 networks. The smallest version of this work.
- Sites
- 1
- devices
- 5
- One office
- WiFi only
- Findings report
- — Bluetooth and other radio protocols
- — More than one site
Core Wireless Attack Assessment
$35K
Essential wireless security testing covering basic WiFi and Bluetooth attacks
- Sites
- 2
- devices
- 15
- WiFi and Bluetooth
- Up to two sites
- — Cellular and other radio protocols
Advanced Wireless Attack Program
$60K
WiFi, Bluetooth and additional radio protocols at up to 4 sites.
- Sites
- 4
- devices
- 40
- Additional radio protocols
- Up to four sites
- — Custom tooling
Enterprise Wireless Attack Solution
$95K
All radio technologies at up to 8 sites, with custom tooling handed over at the end.
- Sites
- 8
- devices
- 100
- All radio technologies
- Up to eight sites
- Tooling handover
- — Ongoing monitoring
Members: engagement coupons from the CISO Marketplace coupon book apply to services. There is no blanket discount.
What's inside this engagement
Phase by phase.
How a network & infrastructure testing engagement runs, what happens in each phase and what you see. Exact scope, tier and timeline are fixed in your proposal and SOW.
01Scoping & rules of engagement
Ranges, hosts, windows, out-of-bounds systems and emergency contacts agreed in writing.
You see · A signed ROE and a named contact.
02Reconnaissance & mapping
External and internal attack surface enumerated: services, versions, trust relationships.
You see · Nothing yet; this is quiet work.
03Vulnerability discovery
Automated coverage plus manual verification. Scanner noise is filtered out before anything is reported.
You see · Heads-up on any confirmed critical.
04Exploitation & chaining
Confirmed weaknesses are exploited safely and chained to show real impact: lateral movement, privilege escalation, data access.
You see · Evidence of what an attacker could reach.
05Reporting & debrief
Executive summary, technical findings with reproduction steps, and a prioritized fix list.
You see · The report and a walkthrough with your team.
06Retest
Fixed findings are re-verified and the report reissued, where the tier includes it.
You see · Proof the issues are closed.
Commercials
From first call to final report.
- 01
Scoping call
A practitioner, not a salesperson, walks through targets, constraints and what a good outcome looks like for you.
- 02
Proposal & rules of engagement
A fixed-scope proposal with tier, price and deliverables. Rules of engagement, contacts and out-of-bounds systems are agreed in writing.
- 03
Sign, then start
MSA and SOW are signed electronically and the deposit is paid. Only then does testing begin.
- 04
Execution
Testing runs to the agreed plan. Critical findings are escalated as they are found; you don't wait for the report.
- 05
Report & debrief
An executive summary plus technical findings with evidence, reproduction steps and fixes, walked through with your team.
- 06
Retest
Where the tier includes it, we verify your fixes and reissue the report, so auditors and customers see the issues closed.
Timelines are set per engagement in the SOW.
Related
Red Team Subscription
A standing offensive testing program in place of a once-a-year engagement. Each month our team runs a targeted assessment against an agreed part of your environment; each quarter a scenario-based attack tests how well your people and tooling detect and respond. The Premium tier adds two full red team engagements a year. Findings from every cycle feed one running improvement plan, so each round also checks whether the last round's fixes held. Targets, rules of engagement and testing windows are agreed at kickoff.
AI & Agentic Red Team
Offensive testing of LLMs and AI agents — prompt injection, jailbreaks, tool misuse, agent goal hijack, memory/context poisoning, model extraction, and agent identity abuse. Mapped to OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications, OWASP LLM Top 10, and MITRE ATLAS.
AI/ML Security Assessment
Expert evaluation of artificial intelligence and machine learning systems security, from model development to deployment. Our assessment identifies vulnerabilities in AI/ML infrastructure, examines risks of data poisoning, adversarial attacks, and model manipulation while providing guidance for securing these advanced technologies.
Research
Latest from the blog
cloud-security · Sep 6, 2026
GPUThor and the Unpatchable Layer: When Your AI Infrastructure Risk Is Silicon, Not Software
University of Toronto researchers demonstrated a Rowhammer attack that defeats on-die ECC on NVIDIA workstation GPUs and reaches host root in about 1.1 minutes, down from roughly 22 hours. No software patch is possible, and the proof of concept is scheduled for November 15. Paired with NVIDIA's NemoClaw DNS-rebinding flaw, it defines the hardware boundary of AI infrastructure risk.
threat-intelligence · Aug 27, 2026
QScan and QTRouter Seized: The Federal Reserve, NASA, and the Senate Were Breached Through Somebody Else's IoT
On August 26, 2026, DOJ and the FBI seized two platforms operated by QTFY, a Chinese state-sponsored group employed by a Nanjing contractor. QScan mass- infected IoT devices worldwide; QTRouter turned them into an anonymizing relay network. Victims include NASA, the Federal Reserve, DOE, DOJ, HHS, NIH, and the U.S. Senate. The lesson is about your own edge devices — as infrastructure for someone else's operation.
operations · Aug 25, 2026
A Tale of Two SOCs: CISA Ran the Same Attack Against Two Organizations. One Caught It in Two Minutes. One Never Saw It.
CISA advisory AA26-237A, published August 25, 2026, documents red team assessments against two critical infrastructure organizations using comparable tradecraft. Organization B isolated hosts in 2 to 20 minutes. Organization A was fully compromised — domain, cloud, and the security team's own communications — and detected nothing. CISA attributes the gap to people and process, not tooling. That finding should change how you spend.
Start an engagement