01
Access logs pulled, not screenshotted
Who has access to what, pulled directly from the system that grants it, instead of an admin exporting a spreadsheet before every review.
Home/Compliance Automation
Compliance Automation
Compliance Automation Isn't a Dashboard. It's Evidence That Shows Up Without Anyone Collecting It.
A compliance platform can track which controls exist. It usually can't reach into your actual systems to prove they're working, so someone still exports access logs, screenshots settings, and chases signatures the week before an audit. We connect the platform to the systems it's supposed to be watching.
What compliance automation actually requires
The checklist part, which controls apply and whether they're marked done, is the easy part. Most compliance tools already do that. The harder part is the evidence: proving a control is actually enforced in the system it governs, not just checked off in a separate tracker.
When that connection doesn't exist, the compliance tool becomes one more place someone has to update by hand, on top of actually doing the work. The automation only pays off when the tracker and the real systems are talking.
One of our recent projects
Consumer Goods Manufacturer
SAP Business One with several online sales channels.
The problemWeb and marketplace orders are keyed into SAP by hand each day, and stock numbers go back out to the channels by file, hours late.
Orders enter SAP as they're placed and available stock flows back to every channel automatically. Overselling dropped and the data-entry job disappeared.
What We Connect
02
Policy acknowledgment that tracks itself
A new hire or policy update triggers the acknowledgment request and records who's confirmed, without someone chasing signatures in a shared inbox.
03
An audit trail auditors can actually use
Change history and approval records pulled from the systems where the actual work happened, formatted the way an auditor expects to see it.
04
Drift flagged before the audit, not during it
A setting that falls out of compliance, an expired certification, an access grant that should've been revoked, flagged the week it happens, not the week of the audit.
05
One record instead of five trackers
Evidence that used to live in a spreadsheet, an email thread, and three systems' native logs, pulled into whatever platform your audit actually runs against.
The result isn't a nicer-looking compliance dashboard. It's an audit where the evidence was already current when someone asked for it, instead of a week of exports and screenshots.
Software we connect for this
Let's talk
Still collecting evidence by hand before every audit?
Tell us what your audit actually asks for and which systems hold the answer. We'll tell you what's realistic to connect.
Let's talk →Questions people ask
What is compliance automation?
Connecting the systems that hold compliance-relevant data, access controls, change logs, policy acknowledgments, to whatever tracker or platform your audit runs against, so evidence is current without someone exporting and uploading it by hand.
Does this replace our compliance platform (Vanta, Drata, Secureframe, etc.)?
No. Those platforms are good at tracking which controls apply and organizing the audit itself. What we build is the connection between that platform and your actual systems, so the evidence it needs shows up on its own.
Which frameworks does this work for?
Whatever your audit is against, SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, or an internal policy review. The framework determines what evidence is needed; we build the pipeline that gets it there.
Our data is sensitive. How do you handle that?
We plan around it up front: what moves, where it's stored, and who has access. If a step shouldn't be automated given what it touches, we'll tell you.
How long does this take to set up?
Depends on how many systems are in scope and how your current evidence gets collected today. Tell us what your audit asks for and we'll give you a real estimate.