External SOC 2 Assessment
An External SOC 2 Assessment is an independent audit performed by a licensed Certified Public Accountant (CPA) firm to evaluate a service organization's internal controls regarding the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy of customer data.
This assessment results in a System and Organization Controls (SOC) 2 report. This report serves as the primary mechanism for technology service providers—such as SaaS platforms, cloud providers, and data centers—to demonstrate to their clients that they use compliant and effective security practices to protect sensitive information.
The Purpose of an External Assessment
The primary goal of an external SOC 2 assessment is to validate that a vendor's non-financial reporting controls are designed correctly and operating effectively. Unlike an internal audit, which is conducted by the organization's own staff for internal improvement, an external assessment offers objective, third-party attestation that can be shared with stakeholders.
Organizations undergo this process to:
Build Trust: Prove to clients and partners that their data is secure.
Meet Regulatory Requirements: Satisfy compliance obligations in regulated industries.
Accelerate Sales Cycles: Remove security objections during the vendor procurement process.
Mitigate Risk: Identify and fix control gaps before they are exploited.
The 5 Trust Services Criteria (TSC)
An external SOC 2 assessment measures an organization's controls against the Trust Services Criteria established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). While only the Security criterion is mandatory, organizations may include others based on their specific business operations.
Security (Common Criteria): The system is protected against unauthorized access, use, or modification. This is the only required criterion for every SOC 2 audit.
Availability: The system is available for operation and use as committed or agreed. This is critical for downtime-sensitive services like hosting providers.
Confidentiality: Information designated as confidential is protected to meet the entity’s objectives. This applies to companies holding sensitive intellectual property or proprietary data.
Processing Integrity: System processing is complete, valid, accurate, timely, and authorized. This is essential for transaction-heavy platforms like payment processors.
Privacy: Personal information is collected, used, retained, disclosed, and disposed of to meet the entity’s objectives. This is relevant for companies handling Personally Identifiable Information (PII).
Types of External SOC 2 Assessments
External auditors perform two distinct types of SOC 2 assessments. Understanding the difference is vital for organizations planning their compliance roadmap.
SOC 2 Type 1: Point-in-Time Audit
A SOC 2 Type 1 report assesses the design of a service organization's controls at a specific point in time.
Focus: It answers the question, "Are the security controls designed suitably to meet the relevant criteria right now?"
Duration: The audit is faster because it does not test the effectiveness of controls over time.
Use Case: Best for startups or companies that need to prove compliance quickly to secure a new client.
SOC 2 Type 2: Period-of-Time Audit
A SOC 2 Type 2 report assesses both the design and the operating effectiveness of controls over a specific period, typically 6 to 12 months.
Focus: It answers the question, "Did the controls work effectively and consistently throughout the entire audit period?"
Duration: This requires a longer observation window and more rigorous evidence collection.
Use Case: This is the gold standard for mature organizations and is often required by enterprise customers.
The External Assessment Process
The lifecycle of an external SOC 2 assessment typically follows a structured path involving the service organization and the external auditor.
1. Scoping and Readiness
Before the auditor begins, the organization defines the audit scope (which systems and Trust Services Criteria will be included). Many companies perform a "readiness assessment" or "gap analysis" first to identify and fix weaknesses.
2. Information Request and Fieldwork
The external auditor provides an Information Request List (IRL). The organization uploads evidence—such as policy documents, screenshots of configuration settings, and employee onboarding records—to prove their controls are active. During fieldwork, the auditor reviews this evidence and may interview staff.
3. Testing and Analysis
The auditor tests the controls to ensure they function as described. For a Type 2 assessment, they will select samples from populations (e.g., a random sample of 5 new hires) to ensure that processes were consistently followed during the review period.
4. Remediation
If the auditor finds discrepancies or "exceptions," the organization may have a brief window to correct the issue or explain the variance. Significant failures may be noted in the final report.
5. Final Report Issuance
The auditor issues the final SOC 2 report. This document includes the auditor's opinion, a description of the system, the specific controls tested, and the results of those tests.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can perform an external SOC 2 assessment?
Only a licensed CPA firm (Certified Public Accountant) can perform a valid SOC 2 assessment and sign the final report. Security consultants and compliance software vendors can help prepare for the audit, but they cannot issue the final certification.
How long does an external SOC 2 assessment take?
A Type 1 audit can take anywhere from 2 weeks to a few months, depending on the organization's readiness. A Type 2 audit requires an observation period of at least 3 to 12 months, plus additional time for the auditor to review evidence and draft the report.
Is an external SOC 2 assessment mandatory by law?
No, SOC 2 is a voluntary compliance standard, not a legal requirement like HIPAA or GDPR. However, it is effectively mandatory in the B2B technology market because enterprise buyers often refuse to work with vendors that cannot provide a SOC 2 report.
How ThreatNG Facilitates External SOC 2 Assessments
ThreatNG serves as a critical tool for organizations undergoing an external SOC 2 assessment by providing an objective, outside-in validation of security controls. While internal audits focus on policies and internal configurations, ThreatNG validates whether those controls are effectively preventing external exposure. Automating the discovery of digital assets and assessing them against known attack vectors provides the evidentiary support auditors need to verify Trust Services Criteria (TSC) compliance.
External Discovery
The foundation of a successful SOC 2 assessment is a complete and accurate asset inventory. You cannot secure or audit what you do not know exists. ThreatNG supports this by performing purely external, unauthenticated discovery without the need for connectors or agents.
This capability directly supports SOC 2 Common Criteria related to asset management and logical access. By identifying all internet-facing assets—including forgotten subdomains, cloud environments, and shadow IT—ThreatNG ensures the SOC 2 audit scope is accurate and comprehensive.
Subdomain Discovery: Identifies all associated subdomains, ensuring legacy or marketing sites are not excluded from the control environment.
Cloud Environment Identification: It detects subdomains hosted on platforms like AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, alerting the organization to assets that may require specific cloud security controls.
Technology Stack Enumeration: It identifies the specific technologies, vendors, and frameworks in use (e.g., WordPress, Shopify, Salesforce), allowing auditors to verify that vendor risk management and patch management controls are applied correctly.
External Assessment
Once assets are discovered, ThreatNG assesses them for security weaknesses. This process aligns with the SOC 2 Common Criteria for Security (CC) and specific criteria for Availability, Confidentiality, and Privacy. The platform performs detailed checks that act as automated evidence of control effectiveness or failure.
Web Application Security Assessment
ThreatNG evaluates web assets for susceptibility to hijacking and client-side attacks.
Mechanism: It analyzes subdomains for the presence of key security headers like Content-Security-Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict-Transport-Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options.
SOC 2 Relevance: Missing headers like CSP are directly relevant to Security (CC6.1, CC6.6) and Confidentiality (C1.1) criteria. A missing CSP allows attackers to execute Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks, which can bypass access controls and steal confidential session data.
Example: If ThreatNG detects a subdomain missing the X-Frame-Options header, it flags a risk of Clickjacking. This finding serves as evidence that the organization needs to update its configuration management standards to meet SOC 2 security requirements.
Subdomain Takeover Susceptibility
ThreatNG identifies "dangling DNS" records that point to third-party services that are no longer in use.
Mechanism: The solution performs DNS enumeration to find CNAME records pointing to vendors like AWS S3, Heroku, or GitHub. It validates if the resource is inactive, confirming that an attacker could claim the subdomain.
SOC 2 Relevance: This maps to Security (CC6.1) and Availability. A takeover allows an attacker to host malicious content on a trusted domain, bypassing logical access controls and potentially disrupting service trust.
Example: An attacker claims an abandoned subdomain pointing to an unclaimed AWS bucket and uses it to host a phishing page. ThreatNG identifies this risk before it can be exploited, demonstrating proactive monitoring.
Data Leak and Privacy Assessment
ThreatNG scans for sensitive data exposure that could violate Confidentiality and Privacy criteria.
Mechanism: It checks for files in open cloud buckets, sensitive code secrets in public repositories, and PII in archived web pages.
SOC 2 Relevance: The discovery of files in open cloud buckets is a critical failure of Confidentiality (C1.1) and Privacy (P1.1) controls. It indicates that access control lists (ACLs) are misconfigured.
Example: ThreatNG finds a configuration file containing API keys in a public cloud bucket. This finding helps the organization close the gap before the audit, ensuring compliance with the "Confidentiality" criterion.
Brand Damage and Phishing Susceptibility
ThreatNG assesses the risk of impersonation and social engineering.
Mechanism: It analyzes domain name permutations (typosquatting), checks for missing DMARC/SPF records, and identifies compromised credentials on the dark web.
SOC 2 Relevance: This supports Security criteria related to incident response (CC7.3) and access control (CC6.1). Missing DMARC records allow attackers to spoof emails and bypass authentication controls.
Example: ThreatNG identifies a registered domain that is a typo of the company's main domain and has an active mail record. This alerts the security team to a potential Business Email Compromise (BEC) campaign, allowing them to block the domain and demonstrate proactive defense to auditors.
Reporting
ThreatNG generates comprehensive reports that translate technical findings into audit-ready documentation. These reports act as a "snapshot in time" for Type 1 assessments or a log of continuous compliance for Type 2 assessments.
Security Ratings: It assigns A-F grades across various categories (e.g., Data Leak Susceptibility, Cyber Risk Exposure), providing a quantifiable metric for executive management and auditors to gauge overall posture.
External GRC Assessment: The platform specifically maps findings to compliance frameworks, including SOC 2. This report identifies exposed assets and vulnerabilities from an attacker's perspective and correlates them directly to GRC mandates, allowing organizations to spot compliance gaps instantly.
Prioritized Remediation: Reports include risk levels (High, Medium, Low), reasoning, and recommendations. This demonstrates to auditors that the organization has a defined process for risk ranking and remediation.
Continuous Monitoring
For SOC 2 Type 2 assessments, which cover a period of time (usually 6-12 months), proving "continuous" compliance is essential. Point-in-time scans are insufficient.
ThreatNG provides continuous monitoring of the external attack surface, digital risk, and security ratings. This capability satisfies SOC 2 Common Criteria CC7.2 (Monitoring of System Components).
Drift Detection: ThreatNG detects when new ports are opened, certificates expire, or new subdomains are created. This creates an audit trail that shows the organization is aware of changes to its environment as they occur.
Real-Time Alerts: By feeding alerts into the investigation modules, ThreatNG ensures that security teams can respond to new threats immediately, satisfying Incident Response criteria (CC7.3).
Investigation Modules
ThreatNG includes specialized investigation modules that allow teams to drill down into specific findings. These modules provide the "great detail" required to understand the root cause of a risk and verify if a control is working.
Domain Intelligence
This module provides a deep dive into the organization's domain assets.
DNS Intelligence: It proactively checks for the availability of Web3 domains (like .eth and .crypto) to prevent brand impersonation.
Domain Record Analysis: It identifies the vendors and technologies associated with a domain, such as Cloudflare for security or AWS for hosting. This verifies that third-party vendor controls are in place.
Domain Permutations: It detects typo-squatted domains that are already registered ("taken") and checks if they have mail records (MX records). The presence of an MX record on a typo-domain is a strong indicator of phishing preparation.
Subdomain Intelligence
This module focuses on the security posture of individual subdomains.
Header Analysis: It inspects HTTP responses for security headers. It can pinpoint exactly which subdomains are missing critical headers, such as HSTS or X-Content-Type, which protect against MIME sniffing attacks.
Cloud Hosting Identification: It uncovers where subdomains are hosted (e.g., pointing to Unbounce for landing pages or Zendesk for support). This helps auditors verify that all third-party platforms are accounted for in the vendor risk management program.
Takeover Validation: It performs the specific checks to confirm if a CNAME record is dangling, distinguishing between a theoretical risk and an exploitable vulnerability.
Intelligence Repositories
ThreatNG enriches its findings with data from curated intelligence repositories. This context enables organizations to move from simple "vulnerability scanning" to "risk assessment," a core requirement of SOC 2 (CC2.1).
Dark Web (DarCache Dark Web)
ThreatNG monitors dark web marketplaces and forums for mentions of the organization.
Role in Assessment: It identifies leaked credentials and compromised emails. Finding a valid credential on the dark web acts as a direct test of the organization's access control effectiveness.
Ransomware Groups (DarCache Ransomware)
This repository tracks over 100 ransomware gangs, including their tactics and victim lists.
Role in Assessment: By understanding the specific tactics of active groups (e.g., LockBit exploiting specific vulnerabilities), organizations can prioritize patching based on real-world threat intelligence rather than just CVSS scores.
Vulnerabilities (DarCache Vulnerability)
This includes data from NVD, EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System), and KEV (Known Exploited Vulnerabilities).
Role in Assessment: It allows the organization to prioritize remediation based on the likelihood of exploitation. For a SOC 2 audit, this demonstrates a mature, risk-based approach to vulnerability management rather than a simple "patch everything" policy, which is often unfeasible.
Cooperation with Complementary Solutions
ThreatNG enhances the effectiveness of other security tools within the SOC 2 control environment. By acting as the "eyes" on the outside, it feeds critical intelligence to internal defensive systems.
GRC Platforms
ThreatNG provides the necessary external data to validate the claims made inside Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) platforms.
Example of Cooperation: An organization asserts in its GRC tool that "all public web assets utilize WAFs." ThreatNG scans the perimeter and identifies a new marketing subdomain that bypasses the WAF. It feeds this "failed test" data to the GRC platform, triggering a corrective action plan before the auditor discovers the discrepancy.
SIEM and SOAR Systems
ThreatNG acts as an external sensor for Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) systems.
Example of Cooperation: ThreatNG detects a "Domain Permutation with Mail Record" that is impersonating the company's finance department. It sends this intelligence to the SIEM. The SIEM then updates email filtering rules to block all incoming mail from that malicious domain, effectively automating the control response.
Vulnerability Management Tools
ThreatNG fills the "blind spots" that internal vulnerability scanners often miss.
Example of Cooperation: Internal scanners only scan known IP ranges. ThreatNG performs external discovery and finds a "Shadow IT" server spun up by a developer on a personal cloud account. ThreatNG identifies the asset and passes the IP address to the Vulnerability Management tool, ensuring the asset is added to the inventory and scanned for patch compliance.
Penetration Testing Teams
ThreatNG accelerates the reconnaissance phase for pen testers, allowing them to focus on exploitation.
Example of Cooperation: Instead of spending days mapping the attack surface, the pen test team uses ThreatNG's "Reconnaissance Hub" export to immediately identify open ports, exposed API endpoints, and subdomains with missing security headers. This allows the testers to spend more time testing the depth of the controls, providing a more rigorous validation for the SOC 2 audit.
