How resilient are your IT operations, really?
A brief review of operational stability, recovery, security controls, and evidence. No confidential technical details.
Select your perspective
Select the view that best matches your role. The snapshot will start immediately afterward. You'll answer 8 short questions and receive the results right away.
What the Snapshot Checks
Important: The snapshot is not a substitute for an audit or an in-depth technical analysis. It helps identify the most critical vulnerabilities and determine the correct order of the next steps.
If a critical application or a key IT service goes down: Will you know within 30 minutes what’s affected and who needs to make a decision?
This covers affected applications such as email, ERP, file storage, telephony, online stores, and production, as well as the responsible parties, decision-making processes, and communication.
Do you regularly receive a clear overview of availability, security status, and outstanding IT risks?
This refers to key figures, trends, responsible parties, outstanding issues, and decisions—not just individual technical reports.
Does the company have policies in place specifying which services must be restored and how quickly?
What this means is: Which application needs to be back up and running by when, how much data loss would be acceptable, and who makes the decision in an emergency?
Has the restoration of critical services been realistically tested and documented in the last 6 months?
A backup is only reliable once recovery time, data loss, dependencies, and results have been thoroughly verified.
Have key security measures such as MFA, endpoint protection, patching, and backup protection been verifiably implemented?
It's not just a matter of whether tools are available, but whether protective measures are enforced, verified, and verifiable.
In the event of a security incident, can you make initial decisions and begin containment within 60 minutes?
This refers to roles, escalation, external support, communication, and initial steps to limit the damage.
Are crisis roles, escalation procedures, and communication not only documented but also practiced in real-life scenarios?
A brief annual drill or simulation shows whether the procedures will actually work in an emergency.
Can you provide centralized records of access, backups, changes, and security status within 48 hours?
Relevant for audits, customer inquiries, management, insurance, and incident response.
Do you identify service impacts end-to-end, or do you mainly look at individual components?
This refers to dependencies, visibility into business-critical services, prioritization, and correlation—rather than just host or component status.
Are alerting, escalation, and runbooks established to the point where response times can be measured?
The response should be repeatable: clear alerts, defined responsibilities, escalation procedures, runbooks, and measurable response and resolution times.
When was the last time a realistic recovery of critical services was carried out with measurable results?
Relevant factors include actual dependencies, recovery steps, measured recovery time, tolerable data loss, and a log that can be analyzed.
Are backups protected against deletion or encryption, and is the restoration process verified on a regular basis?
For example, immutable or isolated backups, separate administrative privileges, clear recovery paths, and regular verification.
Are privileged access and emergency access controlled, logged, and regularly reviewed?
For example, time-limited admin privileges, MFA, logging, access reviews, and a controlled emergency account.
Are incident playbooks practiced in real-world scenarios and evaluated after an incident?
The response should be embedded in the operational routine through drills, lessons learned, and measurable improvements.
Is your asset and service inventory up to date, prioritized, and assigned clear responsibilities?
Relevant factors include responsible parties, criticality, dependencies, review cycles, and the life cycle.
Can you provide reliable evidence of recovery, MFA, patching, logging, alerts, and changes within 48 hours?
This refers to verifiable evidence, not just statements: reports, logs, review records, changes, and critical exceptions.
Your Snapshot
This result shows the overall trend, the most significant weaknesses, and specific next steps right here on this page. A single weak area can increase the overall risk, even if other areas are already functioning well. The form is optional and is intended solely for discussing the snapshot with Unimission.
The responses point to priority gaps in transparency, recovery, security controls, or evidence.
The foundation is in place, but certain areas are still too labor-intensive, lack practice, or cannot be properly documented.
The key fundamentals appear to be robust. The next areas for improvement lie in automation, traceability, and scalability.
interpretation
Your responses indicate a need for immediate action. In the event of an emergency, there is a risk that situational awareness, decisions, recovery efforts, or documentation will not be available in time. Common issues include unclear recovery objectives, untested recovery procedures, insufficient transparency, and manual documentation.
interpretation
Your IT infrastructure appears to be in place, but it is not yet fully reliable. The greatest risks usually lie in areas where testing, responsibilities, documentation, or response procedures are still too manual, irregular, or dependent on specific individuals.
interpretation
Your responses indicate a solid foundation. The next logical step is not stabilization, but standardization, automation, and improved traceability for management, audits, and customer inquiries.
Prioritized Next Steps
- Identify the top three critical services and obtain business approval for the recovery time and acceptable data loss.
- Perform a realistic recovery test and measure recovery time, data loss, and dependencies.
- Clearly define incident roles, escalation procedures, external support, and communication channels.
- Set up a basic set of metrics for access, backup and recovery, patching, and security status.
Prioritized Next Steps
- Define recovery time and acceptable data loss per critical service, and verify these parameters through realistic testing.
- Focus monitoring and alerting more on business impact rather than just a component-level view.
- Standardize privileged access, emergency access, and access reviews in a verifiable manner.
- Structure reports and supporting documentation so that they can be delivered within 48 hours.
Prioritized Next Steps
- Further improve alarm quality: less alarm noise, better correlation, and clearer service priority.
- Establish documentation as a standard process: dashboards, trends, review cycles, and audit records.
- Automate recovery testing more extensively and regularly link it to business scenarios.
- Consistently review and document third parties and critical dependencies.
How Unimission Can Help
Unimission can help prioritize critical services, perform recovery tests, refine monitoring, and establish a minimum set of metrics for operations, security, and recovery.
How Unimission Can Help
Unimission can review and standardize existing controls, backups, monitoring, and access processes, and integrate them into a reliable operational workflow.
How Unimission Can Help
Unimission can help further professionalize reporting, automation, service transparency, and documentation so that IT risks are identified more quickly and documented in a verifiable manner.
What a review should examine first
- Are critical services, dependencies, and business impacts visible?
- Are there clear alerts, priorities, runbooks, and escalation procedures?
- Are management reports clear, timely, and relevant to decision-making?
What a review should examine first
- Have the recovery time and acceptable data loss for critical services been approved by the business?
- Has the recovery process been realistically tested, measured, and documented?
- Are backups protected, isolated, or immutable, and are they verified on a regular basis?
What a review should examine first
- Have MFA, endpoint protection, patch management, and backup protection been implemented in a verifiable manner?
- Are privileged accesses and emergency accesses monitored, logged, and reviewed?
- Can incident playbooks, decision-making processes, and external support be activated?
What a review should examine first
- Are roles, escalation procedures, and communication clearly documented and practiced?
- Is there a current asset and service registry that includes ownership information?
- Can key supporting documents be provided within 48 hours?
What a review should examine first
- Which areas have equally low scores and pose the greatest threat to operational resilience?
- Which three services would be the most critical to your business in the event of an incident?
- Which measures will lead to the fastest reduction in risk over the next 30 days?
Next logical step
In its 20-minute review, Unimission identifies the weakest area from the snapshot and highlights which specific measures—such as monitoring, recovery, access control, patching, or verification—make the most sense to implement first. This information can be used to develop a realistic 30-day action plan.
Book a 20-minute reviewWould you like to know exactly what your result means?
Please fill out the form. Your Snapshot scores will be automatically included so that Unimission can prepare the assessment and address the weakest area right away.
Next step: Fill out the form on the right. After that, we can discuss the snapshot with you in detail.
Have a snapshot categorized
Your information will help us tailor our response to your company's size and your role.
The form is loading. If it gets stuck, please use the review link above.
