See every misconfiguration before attackers do.
Continuous posture, identity, and configuration drift monitoring across AWS, GCP, Azure, and Microsoft 365 explained in plain English.
A complete service, run by people.
Catch drift from CIS, NIST, and your own baselines as it happens.
Find risky roles, dormant admins, and over-permissioned tokens.
Inventory of VMs, containers, buckets, and exposed services.
Detect impossible travel, credential abuse, and lateral movement.
Block insecure Terraform, Pulumi, and CloudFormation in PRs.
Find public buckets, leaked keys, and shared OneDrive/Drive links.
The cloud misconfigurations that cause 80% of breaches
Verizon's Data Breach Investigations Report consistently identifies misconfiguration and misuse as the leading cause of cloud-related breaches, not novel zero-days or sophisticated attacker techniques. The following are the specific misconfiguration classes that Quantm's posture management tooling flags most frequently in Canadian SMB environments at initial assessment.
- Publicly accessible storage buckets: AWS S3, Azure Blob Storage, and Google Cloud Storage buckets set to public read expose data to anyone with the URL, no credentials required. This configuration is often introduced by developers testing an application and never reverted. Canadian organizations have faced OPC investigations directly traceable to unintentionally public storage containing customer records, employee data, and financial documents.
- MFA disabled on admin and privileged accounts: Microsoft's own telemetry indicates that over 99% of account compromise attacks against Azure AD succeed against accounts without MFA. For M365 Global Administrator accounts specifically, which can disable security controls, read all mailboxes, and reset any password, the absence of MFA is effectively an open door. Yet in Quantm's onboarding assessments, a significant minority of SMB tenants have at least one admin account with MFA disabled or set to an easily bypassed legacy method.
- Over-permissioned service accounts and application identities: Service accounts in cloud environments accumulate permissions over time as developers add access for new integrations and rarely remove it. A service account used to read from a single S3 bucket often ends up with S3:* on all buckets within eighteen months. When attackers compromise application credentials, through code repositories, environment variables, or SSRF vulnerabilities, they inherit every permission that service account holds. Least-privilege enforcement for non-human identities is consistently the lowest-maturity control in SMB cloud environments.
- No logging or monitoring on cloud control plane: AWS CloudTrail, Azure Activity Log, and GCP Audit Logs are the primary evidence sources for cloud incident investigation. In many SMB tenants, these logs are either not enabled, retained for only a few days, or not ingested into any SIEM or alerting system. An attacker who creates a new IAM user, elevates privileges, or disables security controls leaves trace evidence only in these logs. Without them, incident scope determination becomes impossible.
- Secrets stored in source code and environment variables: API keys, database connection strings, and cloud provider credentials committed to git repositories, including private repositories, are routinely discovered by automated scanners operated by both security researchers and threat actors. GitHub's secret scanning program detected over 12 million secrets in public repositories in 2023. Private repository access via a single compromised developer account exposes all credentials checked in across the organization's history.
- Unrestricted outbound network access: Cloud workloads with no egress filtering can freely communicate with command-and-control infrastructure, exfiltration endpoints, and credential-harvesting sites. Network security groups and VPC firewall rules default to permissive outbound configurations in most cloud providers. Without explicit egress controls, a compromised workload can exfiltrate terabytes of data with no network-layer signal.
- Stale external sharing in M365 and Google Workspace: SharePoint and OneDrive "share with anyone" links, Google Drive files shared externally without expiry, and Teams guest accounts from former contractors accumulate over time in every SMB tenant. These links represent uncontrolled access to business data that exists entirely outside your identity perimeter. A 2023 survey of Canadian M365 tenants conducted by a national managed security provider found that the average SMB had over 400 active "anyone with the link" sharing permissions on files containing sensitive data.
Who's responsible for what in the cloud
The split is well-documented in provider terms of service, but the majority of cloud breaches happen because SMBs don't realize which side of the line they're on.
- Your data, identities, and access controls
- Application configuration and network security groups
- Service account permissions and MFA enforcement
- Compliance with PIPEDA's accountability principle for stored personal information
- Physical infrastructure and hypervisor integrity
- Network backbone and underlying platform services
- Provider-side patching of the cloud platform itself
Cloud data residency requirements under PIPEDA
PIPEDA doesn't prohibit transferring personal information outside Canada, but the accountability principle means the transferring organization remains responsible for how it's handled abroad, and Quebec's Law 25 adds a stricter Privacy Impact Assessment requirement on top. Many SMBs discover during their first OPC inquiry or Law 25 audit that they can't answer the basic question of where their data physically resides, because no one mapped it when cloud services were first adopted.
Three measures that satisfy most residency obligations
| Measure | Requirement | Applies to |
|---|---|---|
| Canadian data center regions | Use Azure Canada Central, AWS ca-central-1, or GCP northamerica-northeast1/2 where available | Any SMB storing personal information in the cloud |
| Data Processing Agreements | Execute DPAs with cloud providers addressing PIPEDA/Law 25 accountability and safeguards | Cross-border data transfers to any provider |
| Privacy Impact Assessment | Document sensitivity, transfer purpose, and destination-jurisdiction adequacy before transfer | Quebec-based organizations (Law 25) transferring data outside Quebec |
What changes after week one.
You'll feel the difference fast fewer alerts, faster response, and a clearer picture of where your real risk lives.
- One inventory of every cloud account, identity, and exposed asset
- Fix the 5 misconfigurations that cause 80% of cloud breaches
- Stop reading vendor reports get a prioritized weekly action list
- Pass CIS, ISO 27001, and SOC 2 cloud control evidence requests
- Lock down M365 and Workspace defaults that ship insecure
From kickoff to coverage in days.
Read-only API connections to your cloud and identity providers.
We map your assets, identities, and current posture in 48 hours.
Top issues ranked by exploitability and blast radius not severity score.
We work with your engineers to ship fixes and prevent regressions.
Common questions, answered.
The things buyers ask us most about scope, onboarding, and what you'll see in your monthly report.
Ask us anythingMake your cloud boring again.
See your real cloud risk in one report. We'll show you the 10 things worth fixing this quarter.