Not sure where to start? Tell us where you are.

Seed through Series B companies — primarily FinTech and regulated technology environments — preparing for SOC 2 or PCI-DSS audits, and AI-native teams hardening agentic infrastructure ahead of enterprise security reviews. Most clients are in one of three situations: starting a compliance program from scratch, failing controls on a GRC platform they already have, or building the technical foundation before compliance becomes urgent.

FEDLIN runs one embedded program, delivered in five phases. (1) Security Assessment & Gap Analysis — threat model and gap assessment mapped to your target framework. (2) Control Implementation — security controls built at the infrastructure layer, CI/CD gates, IAM enforcement, and continuous evidence instrumentation. (3) SSP Development — system boundary documentation, control narratives, and control-to-framework mapping. (4) Compliance Readiness Review — pre-audit control validation before fieldwork begins. (5) Evidence Pipeline & ConMon Setup — GRC platform configured to collect continuously against your actual stack. Clients run the full program, or enter at the phase that fits where they are.

Yes — AI-native security is a core part of the practice. Agentic systems, MCP servers, and LLM integrations introduce a compliance perimeter that standard gap assessments don't reach: context boundary enforcement, tool-call access scope, prompt injection exposure, and audit logging fidelity. We assess and harden these surfaces against SOC 2 and PCI-DSS control requirements, and map findings to NIST AI RMF — the framework enterprise buyers and regulators are increasingly referencing for AI governance.

Yes — this is one of the most common entry points. Vanta surfaces the gaps; we own the technical layer that closes them. That means deploying the controls, wiring the evidence pipeline, and getting your dashboard from red to audit-ready. If you have persistent failures on specific controls — CC6.1, CC7.2, CC8.1 — that's exactly the kind of scoped remediation work we take on.

SOC 2 (Trust Services Criteria), PCI-DSS, NIST 800-53 Rev 5, and ISO 42001. The underlying methodology is NIST CSF, which maps to all of them — and NIST AI RMF for engagements that include AI-native infrastructure. If you're targeting a framework not listed, ask — most structured frameworks overlap significantly with these.

Scope and starting posture determine this more than any fixed timeline. The Architecture Review typically returns a gap report within two to four weeks. Targeted control remediation sprints close specific gaps in two to four weeks. A full program build — Architecture Review through Evidence Pipeline — typically runs two to three months. We define scope before any work begins so you know what's included and what the timeline looks like.