Private Equity

Cyber risk shows up in the model — at close, and again at exit.

You inherit infrastructure you did not build. Buyers now price that risk into the offer. We start from the architecture each portco actually runs, then keep pressure on it through the hold period — so diligence, value creation, and the exit file are evidence, not a last-minute scramble.

Talk to an operator
After-hours deal table — closed laptops, diligence binder, empty chairs

Why this matters now

The risk is moving. The emphasis has to move with it.

Cyber is no longer a questionnaire at signing. It is a line in the model — and the firms that treat it as a value-creation lever walk into exit with a story buyers will pay for.

What’s changing

Diligence that prices risk into the offer

What it exposes

Inherited identity, cloud, and access you cannot see on day one

Why it matters to the business

A slower close — or terms written around what you did not find

What’s changing

Hold-period evidence, not a cleanup sprint

What it exposes

Gaps that compound across a portfolio with thin security teams

Why it matters to the business

Value creation you can show — or a scramble in the last two quarters

What’s changing

Buyers who read the cyber file

What it exposes

Whether residual risk is proven closed, or just ticketed

Why it matters to the business

Exit narrative and valuation, not a compliance appendix

What’s changing

Scale without a security-engineer army

What it exposes

Portcos that cannot staff continuous testing themselves

Why it matters to the business

A platform motion — Aludra and Portal — that the firm can actually run

In this environment

What we look for across a portfolio

The firm needs one way to see inherited risk. Each portco has its own architecture. We map both — then build the engagement around the deal calendar, not a generic assessment.

  • Inherited identity and access

    Accounts, vendors, and privileges that arrived with the asset.

  • Cloud and application estates

    What the portco actually runs — including what diligence missed.

  • Deal-speed and first-100-days windows

    What has to be known before close, and what can wait until value creation.

  • Thin portco security teams

    Where continuous testing has to come from the platform, not a new hire.

  • Firm-level visibility

    What operating partners and the deal team can see without another slide deck.

Portfolio operating room with empty workstations and a dark wall display

The question we prove

Do we know what this portco inherited — and can an attacker use it before the hold period pays off?

We prove whether inherited identity, cloud, or a vendor path is actually exploitable — then keep testing it. The point is not a one-time report. It is evidence the next buyer can diligence.

The path we walk

A path from inherited access to the model

This is the progression that turns a portco IT problem into a value event. We find it, prove it, and keep it closed through the hold period.

  1. 01

    Inherited identity

  2. 02

    Unknown cloud / app

  3. 03

    Privilege

  4. 04

    Material incident

  5. 05

    Valuation / exit impact

    Valuation impact

Where Open Security meets the path

  1. Find
  2. Validate
  3. Prioritize
  4. Remediate
  5. Retest
Aludra knowledge graph used to map inherited access paths across portfolio companies

What leadership sees

What a finding means for the deal

A vulnerability list is not an operating partner briefing. Whether it can become a material incident — and what that does to close or exit — is.

Consequence

Which portco, deal timeline, or exit narrative the path can actually hit.

Priority

Sequenced by valuation impact — not a generic severity score.

Regulation

Mapped to buyer diligence, LP questions, and the sector rules that portco already faces.

Ownership

Portco management, the operating partner, and the vendor still on the path.

Remediation

A fundable sequence inside the hold period — not a cleanup in the last quarter.

Leadership visibility

Portal so the firm sees residual risk across the portfolio in deal language.

Frameworks this maps to

  • Buyer diligence

    Evidence a sophisticated buyer will actually read at exit.

  • SOC 2 / sector rules

    Portco obligations that show up in the data room.

  • LP governance

    A defensible answer before the next capital-raise question.

After the assessment

The work continues through the hold period

A diligence snapshot is not an exit file. Continuous validation, retesting, and readiness stay on the asset until the buyer reads the evidence.

Remediation inside the value-creation plan

Fixes sequenced so material paths close early in the hold — not in the sale window.

Retesting that becomes buyer evidence

The same inherited path, walked again, so the data room is more than a ticket export.

Tabletops for material incidents

Who calls the operating partner, what hits the model, and how fast the story holds.

Training the portco can actually absorb

Awareness sized for thin teams — not an enterprise program they cannot staff.

Continuous validation across the portfolio

Aludra keeps pressure on changing identity and cloud between assessments.

Proof, in this industry’s language

Mid-market sponsor

Hold period

continuous validation without a security-engineer army

Aludra kept pressure on inherited identity and cloud paths so the exit file was evidence — not a last-minute scramble.

Know what you inherited — before it prices the deal.

Talk through the portfolio with an operator. Diligence, hold-period validation, and an exit file buyers will actually read.