For Organisations
Know before
you're asked.
Your board reviews cyber threats quarterly. Who briefs them on the physical ones?
The asymmetry
The accountability sits at board level. The reporting rarely does.
Cyber risk built its board rhythm over a decade: converged reporting, standing agenda items, clear ownership. Protective security — the threats that arrive through the front door, the car park, the perimeter, and the people — has no such rhythm unless someone builds it.
The obligations have not waited for the reporting to catch up. CIRMP annual reports under the SOCI Act are signed at board level. Directors' duties extend to foreseeable physical harm. When the question comes — from a regulator, an insurer, a coroner, or a journalist — "what did the board know, and when?" is answered from the record.
Our work in this lane exists so that record holds up.
The standing relationship
A reporting rhythm your governance calendar already understands
A standing capability that keeps the board's threat picture current and its decisions documented, year round.
Why boards rely on it
Boards already rely on this work
The intelligence work runs on the same discipline as our published research, and it is already relied on in government.
In service
State-government engagement
Our standing threat intelligence supports a multi-year engagement with a state government agency, with reporting that is briefed upward, on the record.
Peer-reviewed process
A method that survives review
The analytical process behind the briefs is built on peer-reviewed foundations.
Underneath it all
The incident database
A detailed incident database sits under the judgement, so likelihood language means something and every assessment traces back to recorded events.
The briefing is the demonstration.
A 45-minute executive threat briefing, drawn from our published research and live intelligence pipeline. Request one; if the fit is right, we'll find the time.