Take control
of your security
Security estates rarely fail all at once – they drift. Configuration nobody remembers, changes that weren’t logged, a growing surface and the same stretched team. We run security as a consolidated solution – configured, maintained and continuously assured, so control is something you can demonstrate, not just claim.
Security used to be a box.
Now it's a control surface
Most organisations deployed their firewalls properly. The right vendor, a reasonable rule set, someone who understood the environment. That was the model: install the hardware, configure it well, leave it alone.
Auditors and assessors have moved on from that model. They expect evidence of governance, not just the presence of a firewall. Change control records. Patch logs. Rule ownership and expiry. Defensible posture, not the assumption of it.
Many firewall estates were never set up to produce that evidence. The question is no longer whether the firewall exists. It’s whether you can prove it’s been managed.
Security that nobody's quite minding
Nobody made a conscious decision to let the security estate drift. It happened gradually.
The estate grew. New sites were added. Rules were opened for projects that finished, but nobody closed them. A patch was skipped once during a busy period and then quietly forgotten. The person who originally configured everything left, and their replacement inherited a system with no documentation and no ownership register.
Nobody has done anything wrong, exactly. But the cumulative effect is an environment where security posture is eroding slowly, nobody has full visibility, and audit questions about governance, patching and change control can’t be answered cleanly.
Most organisations don’t find out how bad it is until the auditor asks. Or something goes wrong.
Where the conversation usually starts
An audit finding to remediate
Assessors have flagged firewall governance, patch status or change control. The finding has to be closed before the next cycle, with evidence to support it.
A hardware refresh or vendor consolidation
End-of-life firewalls, an expiring support contract, or a multi-vendor estate inherited through acquisition. The procurement moment is the natural one to add a managed service rather than repeat the unmanaged pattern.
A capacity gap that's no longer ignorable
The internal team is stretched. Security is one of several things the IT generalist is trying to keep on top of. Something is going to slip, and everybody knows it.
Standardising policy across an inconsistent estate
Multiple sites, multiple vendors, different setups, no central governance. Often the legacy of organic growth or acquisition. Standardisation reduces exposure, simplifies operations, and gives the business one security posture rather than several.
A new leader inheriting an estate
A new CISO, Head of Security or IT Director doing a baseline review. They need to know what they own, what posture it’s in, and what risk they’ve inherited, fast.
Ready to
take control?
Managed
Firewall
Managed policy and operations across sites, campus, data centres and clouds. UTM capabilities including DNS filtering, Geo-IP, antivirus, IPS/IDS and deep packet inspection. Change control, patch management, posture reporting and compliance documentation built in.
Secure Application
Access
Web Application Firewall (WAF) protection for public-facing web applications and APIs against OWASP Top 10 attacks, DDoS, bot abuse and application-layer threats. Available as a managed service rather than something you have to tune yourself.
Add what you need, when you need it
Secure Internet
Access
for inspected, policy-controlled internet egress across users, sites and applications
Secure Private
Access
for zero trust remote access to private applications, replacing or complementing legacy VPN
Common questions about
managed security services
How do we tell what state our security is actually in?
Start with an honest baseline: what’s deployed, how it’s configured, what’s drifted, and where the gaps sit against the standards you’re held to. You can’t take control of an estate you can’t currently describe, so the assessment comes before any change.
Should we manage security in-house, co-manage it, or hand it over?
It’s a question of where your team’s time is best spent, not of capability. If keeping the estate current, documented and audit-ready is pulling skilled people off higher-value work, a managed or co-managed model buys that time back while you keep control of policy.
We've built up firewalls, web filtering, remote access and a WAF from different places. Is that a problem?
Not necessarily, but you should think about what happens in the grey areas between security silos. If the operating model isn’t consistent, changes can go unlogged, policies conflict, and proving posture means pulling from several tools. Bringing them under one platform is what turns a collection of controls into something you can run and evidence.
What does a security baseline assessment cover?
A security baseline assessment documents the current state of a firewall or security estate before a managed service takes over: inventory of devices, current configurations, rule base condition, patch status, identified vulnerabilities, governance gaps, and posture against relevant frameworks (DSPT, CAF, Cyber Essentials Plus). Cloud Gateway starts every managed security engagement with a baseline assessment so the operating model is built on a known starting point rather than assumptions.
How do we prove security is under control, not just present?
Evidence should be a by-product of running the infrastructure, change records, posture reports and policy logs generated as things happen, rather than assembled the week before an audit. If producing proof is a project every time, control is being asserted, not demonstrated.
Connect. Protect. Observe. Operated as one.
Get your regulated connectivity right first time.