Most security testing looks at one system in isolation. Here's how NYX SEC actually tests — across AI systems, applications, physical premises, and people.
Most companies looking for security testing run into the same narrow set of options: a generic penetration testing firm running the same checklist for every client, an automated scanner producing a report that looks thorough without actually being useful, or a single-service vendor who can tell you about one slice of your risk and nothing about the rest.
None of that reflects how a real attacker actually operates. A real adversary doesn't respect the boundary between "network," "application," "AI system," "office building," and "employee inbox" — they go through whichever one is weakest. Testing only one of those in isolation tells you less than you think.
Here's what we actually do, and how we do it differently.
We offer five areas of testing. Clients engage us for one, several, or all of them together, depending on what they actually need to know about their exposure:
Penetration Testing — Manual, in-depth testing of networks, applications, and infrastructure, aimed at finding the vulnerabilities and business logic flaws that automated scanners consistently miss.
AI Red Teaming — Adversarial testing of AI systems and agents: prompt injection, guardrail bypass, data exfiltration, tool misuse, and the failure modes specific to systems that don't behave deterministically.
Threat Intelligence — Understanding what a real adversary targeting your organization would actually know, find, and use before they ever make contact — built on the same reconnaissance techniques a genuine attacker relies on.
Physical Testing — On-site assessments of physical access controls, tailgating resistance, and social engineering at reception and with staff — the layer of security that firewalls and code audits were never built to cover.
Security Awareness & Training — Building the human judgment that technical controls can't replace, informed by what we actually see succeed against real employees during engagements.
These aren't separate product lines competing for budget. They're five ways of answering the same question — where would someone actually get in — and we scope every engagement around what's relevant to a specific client, not a fixed package.
No two organizations have the same attack surface, the same risk tolerance, or the same regulatory pressure. A fintech company handling payment data, a healthcare provider bound by patient confidentiality, and an early-stage startup shipping fast all need fundamentally different things from an assessment — not the same checklist with a different logo on the cover page.
We've worked across sectors including healthcare and fintech, and every engagement starts from the same question: what actually matters for this specific business, and what would genuinely hurt them if it were exploited? The scope, the techniques, and the reporting priorities get built around that answer — not assumed in advance.
Before any active testing begins, we run the same reconnaissance and OSINT work a real adversary would do first — mapping what's publicly exposed about an organization and its people, what a targeted pretext could look like, and where the obvious entry points sit before anyone touches a system directly.
This matters for two reasons. It tells us where a genuine attacker would actually start, rather than where a checklist says to start. And it lets us test whether existing defensive mechanisms — awareness training, access controls, monitoring — hold up against realistic behavior instead of a synthetic test case designed to be caught.
Across every service we offer, the emphasis is on manual, hands-on testing — not running a tool and forwarding the results. Automated scanners are good at catching known technical patterns. They consistently miss the vulnerabilities that only make sense once you understand what a specific business intended a feature to do: a discount code with no usage limit, an approval step that can be skipped by calling the next endpoint directly, an invoice ID never checked against the logged-in user, a fake vendor pretext a receptionist has no reason to doubt.
Those findings require a person thinking like an attacker. That's what we deliver in every engagement, regardless of which service is in scope.
This deserves its own callout because it's the part most vendors in this space quietly skip. A jailbreak or an injection that succeeds once isn't proof of a reliable vulnerability — it might work 1 time in 20, or 18 times in 20, and those numbers call for very different responses. We don't report an AI finding as real until it's been measured across multiple trials, with an actual hit rate attached.
The deliverable is where a lot of testing firms fall short, and it's where we've invested the most. Every report includes:
A report that lists what happened without explaining what it means or what to do about it isn't a finished deliverable. That standard applies whether the engagement was a web app pentest, an AI red team assessment, or a physical walk-through.
The threat landscape — especially around AI — changes month to month. We keep our methodology current by working directly from live research: published vendor incident disclosures, real CVEs affecting AI coding assistants and agent frameworks, government and independent AI safety institute reports, and hands-on practice through platforms like Wraith that model real attack classes. New techniques get incorporated into how we test, not filed away in a slide deck.
Direct engagement, not a queue. You work with the person actually doing the testing and writing the report.
One adversarial partner across every attack surface. Network, application, AI system, physical premises, or your own employees — engage us for one, or engage us for all of them together, scoped to what actually matters for your business.
Findings you can act on. Every report translates technical results into business impact, measured likelihood, and a clear remediation path.
Cross-sector experience, including healthcare and fintech — sectors where the cost of a missed vulnerability isn't hypothetical.
Genuine, current investment in the craft. Built on continuous research and hands-on work with the same incidents and disclosures shaping the field in real time — including AI red teaming, where dedicated adversarial testing is still close to absent in this market.
If nobody has tried to break your systems — technical, physical, or human — on purpose yet, that's the gap we're built to close.
Get in touch to talk about what an assessment would actually look like for your organization.
Tell us what you're building and what you're worried about. We'll come back with a scope, a timeline, and a quote.
Request engagement ▸