Services
Implementation Consulting
Embedded security consulting during your AI build: secure-by-default architecture, guardrails, access controls, and monitoring before you go to production.
OWASP Agentic Top 10 contributor · CISSP · PhD · 15+ years enterprise security
What I bring to your build
Structure your system prompt, few-shot examples, and context management so the prompt is robust against injection and manipulation.
User identity, permissions, data isolation across your LLM system — multi-tenant, role-based, data segregation.
Input/output validation, content filters, semantic guardrails — and testing them against adversarial inputs.
Logging for anomalous usage patterns, and response playbooks for when things go wrong.
Tool permission model, input validation, output verification, and boundary enforcement to prevent privilege escalation.
Engagement structures
Architecture review
One-time, a few days of focused work on your LLM system design before it's built.
Build retainer
Ongoing access over the course of your build, typically 2–6 months.
Pre-launch review
Structured assessment before you ship: testing against known attack patterns, verifying controls.
Pricing
Varies by scope and duration — book a call to discuss.
Common questions
The earlier, the better. Architecture decisions made early determine what's possible later. Retrofitting security is significantly harder and more expensive.
It depends on the engagement. Architecture review is a one-time deep dive. Build retainers have you available for questions, PR reviews, and architecture discussions over the course of your build.
Yes. I'm a technical partner who fills the gap between traditional security and AI-specific risks. Your existing team handles the non-AI security; I handle the AI-specific parts.
It's not too late. I can review the architecture as-is, identify risks, and help implement guardrails before you ship. Pre-launch reviews are specifically designed for this.
Why this matters
Retrofitting security into a deployed LLM system is significantly harder and more expensive than building it in from the start. Architecture decisions made early determine what’s possible later.
Most security consultants review systems after they’re built. I prefer to be involved earlier, when the decisions that determine your security posture are still being made.
You get a dedicated technical resource embedded in your build process: available for architecture review, design questions, security testing of specific components, and regular sessions as the system evolves.
Who this is for
- Engineering teams building LLM-powered products who want security expertise embedded in the process, not called in after something breaks
- Organizations deploying agentic systems where the consequence of a security failure is high: customer data, automated actions, financial operations
- Teams without in-house AI security expertise who want a technical partner they can ask questions of throughout the build
Sounds like a fit?
A short call is usually enough to figure out whether this is what you need and what it would look like.