Compliance frameworks

Compliance is a state,
not a date.

An annual audit describes one day. Buguardian's monthly cycle produces evidence continuously — the same measurement, repeated, dated and kept — which is exactly what these frameworks ask an organisation to show.

A framework asks for evidence. A yearly test gives you one date of it.

Auditors do not ask whether you were secure once. They ask whether you can show a repeatable process — the same checks, run on a schedule, with a record of what changed. That record is a by-product of the monthly cycle, not a separate project.

01 — Repeatable

Same inputs, same score, every month

Nine sources, seven categories, one weighting model. The methodology does not change between assessments, so the trend line is comparable and defensible.

02 — Dated

Every report is a timestamped record

Each monthly cycle closes with a report an auditor can file — not a screenshot, a document with a date, a score and a list of what was found and fixed.

03 — Continuous

Gaps between audits are the risk window

A service opened the month after a pentest sits untested for up to eleven months. Monthly cycles close that window instead of documenting it after the fact.

Framework mapping

What each framework asks. What the monthly cycle produces.

These are the frameworks referenced most often by customers and their auditors. Buguardian is not certified against any of them — it produces the technical evidence the certification process itself requires.

ISO/IEC 27001:2022

Asset inventory, technical vulnerability, review

The standard requires a current asset inventory, regular technical vulnerability management (Annex A 8.8) and periodic independent review. The monthly EASM and vulnerability cycle keeps the inventory current and the review evidence dated.

KVKK · 6698

Appropriate technical measures, audit duty

Article 12 requires data controllers to take technical measures appropriate to the risk and to audit them. Monthly vulnerability and access findings form the audit trail a data controller is expected to keep.

GDPR · 2016/679

Art. 32 testing, Art. 33-34 breach duty

Article 32 calls for a process of regularly testing and evaluating security measures; Articles 33-34 set a breach notification clock. Continuous threat intelligence shortens the time between a leak and its discovery.

LAW NO. 5651

Compliant log retention and archiving

Traffic log retention, signed archiving and reporting on request are legal obligations for in-scope operators. The Security Vault's log management service is built against this exact retention and integrity requirement.

PCI DSS

Segmentation and access evidence

Cardholder data environments require documented segmentation, access control and recurring vulnerability scanning. S3M Security's policy engine and the monthly scan cycle produce the evidence a QSA asks to see.

OWASP · CVE

Public vulnerability and rule coverage

Web application checks and CVE-based detection are aligned to public vulnerability feeds and the OWASP Top 10, so findings map onto categories an auditor or insurer already recognises.

A managed service, not a certificate.

Buguardian is a managed security service. It applies and documents the technical measures that ISO/IEC 27001, KVKK, GDPR, Law No. 5651, PCI DSS and OWASP-aligned scanning require — it does not issue a certification, does not represent a certification body, and does not replace an accredited audit. The monthly report is evidence an auditor can review, not a substitute for the audit itself.

What Buguardian is

Continuous evidence: scans, tests and reports, dated and comparable month over month.

What Buguardian is not

A certification body, an accredited auditor, or a guarantee of compliance status.

Bring your auditor evidence, not a promise.

Start with a free assessment: we map your external attack surface and produce your first posture score, dated and ready to file.

Get your posture score See the programme NO INSTALLATION · NO CREDIT CARD