Hunter Audit Services performs independent IT audits and cybersecurity control assessments — evaluating how technology governance, security controls and technology risk are actually operating, not how they are described in a policy binder.
Hunter Audit Services does not provide penetration testing, managed security services, financial-statement audits, attest opinions, tax services or CPA services.
Technology environments grow through migrations, acquisitions, new platforms and integrations. Control coverage tends to lag behind that growth, and the lag is rarely visible until something forces the question.
Internal audit functions are often staffed for financial and operational work, with IT and cybersecurity coverage handled by whoever is available rather than whoever has the depth. Security tooling produces a large volume of information, but tooling output is not the same as an independent test of whether a control works.
The result is a gap between the control environment leadership believes exists and the one an auditor, regulator, insurer or customer would find.
A written policy, a purchased tool and an approved standard describe intent. Whether the control ran, who reviewed it, and what happened to the exceptions is a separate question.
Control review often maps to who owns a system rather than where risk is concentrated, which leaves predictable gaps at the seams between owners.
Questionnaires answered by the people responsible for the control are a starting point for an audit, not a substitute for one.
Scope is agreed in writing before fieldwork begins, so both sides know what is being examined and what is not. Control design is evaluated first, then operating effectiveness is tested against records that already exist — configurations, tickets, approvals, access records, logs and exception handling.
Findings are written as condition, cause, effect and recommendation, and ranked by risk so remediation can be sequenced rather than attempted all at once. Every finding is discussed before the report is finalized.
The work is principal-led. The person who scopes the engagement is the person who performs it.
A single engagement usually covers a defined subset of the areas below. Reviewing everything at once produces a thinner result than reviewing the right things properly.
One IT or cybersecurity audit, scoped to a specific area and delivered start to finish, with no ongoing commitment.
One or more IT audit areas within an annual plan, executed to internal audit’s methodology, templates and timelines.
An assessment requested by management, a board or an audit committee that wants a view not produced by the function being reviewed.
Independent verification that corrective action taken on prior findings is actually in place and operating before the finding is closed.
Documentation is written to survive review by someone who was not in the room — an audit committee, an external assessor, or the next person to hold the role.
Reports are structured so a reader can find the significant items in the first page and the support for them in the rest. Findings that require translation before anyone can act on them have failed.
The report says what was examined, what was not, and what conclusions the evidence does and does not support. Overstated assurance is worse than no assurance.
Hunter Audit Services performs audit and assessment work. It does not sell, implement or operate security tooling, and it does not audit controls it designed or implemented. It does not issue attestation reports, authorizations to operate or certifications. Hunter Audit Services does not provide financial-statement audits, attest opinions, tax services or CPA services.
IT audit work frequently connects to capacity, federal-control and technology-risk needs.