AI agent security consulting

Who authorizes the action when the model picks a tool?

Serenus One works with security, platform, and product teams on the architecture around agent execution — ownership checks, segregation, and policy at the executor, not in prompts.

Start with a focused conversation about your architecture and highest-consequence agent path.

Production control path Enforced
01
Untrusted intentUser · model · agent
Policy + identity
02
Bounded executorSchema · scope · approval
Ownership + limits
03
Observable actionTrace · rollback · response

Advisory for teams accountable for production AI

CISOs & security leadersAI platform teamsProduct & risk owners

The problem we focus on

The model is not your control plane.

Agents fail when generated output becomes an action — when a model selects a tool, crosses a tenant boundary, or starts something hard to reverse.

We map those paths, design controls around the executor, and help you prove they hold under real inputs.

Work we take on

Architecture, segregation, and readiness.

Three areas where conventional app security usually stops short of agent-specific risk.

01

Control-plane design

Tool access, delegation, and execution boundaries — so models can act without becoming privilege boundaries themselves.

  • Capability tiers and allowlists at the executor
  • Human approval on high-impact actions
  • Policy enforced outside the prompt
02

Data segregation

Cross-tenant routing and confused-deputy paths treated as architecture, not prompt hygiene.

  • Ownership checks on every data access
  • Tenant isolation as an executor property
  • Clear envelopes for inter-agent messages
03

Operational readiness

Observability, rollback, and documentation before the agent ships — aligned across security, platform, and product.

  • Traceable intent → action → data lineage
  • Reversible shutdown paths
  • Artifacts leadership can stand behind

What you leave with

Useful artifacts — not abstract advice.

Each engagement is shaped around the decisions your team needs to make and the controls it needs to implement.

Threat model & trust map

Agent paths, identities, data flows, tools, and high-consequence actions — mapped in one view.

Control architecture

Patterns for authorization, validation, isolation, approvals, and safe execution.

Validation plan

Abuse cases and test criteria that prove controls hold under ambiguous inputs.

Decision-ready roadmap

Prioritized remediation, ownership, and artifacts leaders can act on.

How an engagement runs

Assess, design, validate, operate.

A clear path from exposure to evidence — working alongside the people building and governing the system.

A good fit when

The agent can do more than generate text.

  • The agent can call tools or touch live data.
  • More than one agent, tenant, or permission domain is in play.
  • You need a defensible answer for leadership or audit.

First conversation

Bring the architecture you have.

We will walk the highest-consequence path in your current design and say plainly whether a focused review would help.

Prefer to read first?

Our framework for secure agent deployment — architecture, runtime controls, and governance.

Read the framework