Your product may pass launch and still fail trust review.
I find the collection, consent, logging, export, recovery, and privacy-claim gaps buyers will question before they become expensive.
Send your product URL. Get the first 3 trust risks.
Free fit check — I'll reply with the top 3 issues and the smallest useful next step.
- • Free fit check, not an audit.
- • Send product URL, launch stage, and one concern.
- • I reply with whether a 48-hour teardown, full review, fix sprint, or no-fit makes sense.
Usually answered within 1-3 business days. That first reply is fit guidance; paid 48-hour teardown delivery starts after scope is agreed.
Small business website trust cleanup
A fast first look for motels, plumbers, contractors, clinics, salons, and other local services. Send your website and I’ll identify the top 3 trust issues that keep customers from calling or booking.
Free fit check, not an audit. Direct email: crisiscore.systems@proton.me. Do not include sensitive personal data in the first note. If safer intake is needed, write "secure channel needed."
Compliance automation proves controls exist. This work checks whether the product behavior is worth defending in the first place.
Over-collection, weak consent, brittle recovery, and risky defaults buyers, users, auditors, or regulators will question first.
A short list of issues, fixes, and next moves. Written readout, not a slide deck and not a generic compliance checklist.
Start with the dedicated offer page if you need to know what gets reviewed, what comes back, and how to request the work.
Use the broader route if you want the explanatory layer, product ecosystem, and doctrine behind the service work.
Inspect the evidence path first if you need proof before you care about the pitch.
Get a 3-point risk read.
Free fit check, not an audit. Send the product URL, launch stage, and one concern. I'll reply with whether this looks like a 48-hour teardown, full review, fix sprint, or no-fit.
- • Send product URL, launch stage, and one concern.
- • Get the first 3 defensibility gaps and the recommended next step.
- • Use this before buying a larger review path.
Usually answered within 1-3 business days. That first reply is fit guidance; paid 48-hour teardown delivery starts after scope is agreed.
The same method used in client work is visible in public: PainTracker (a minimization-first production app), ProofVault (release-bound trust evidence), and the Overton Framework canon.
Services
48-Hour Trust Risk Brief
A ranked 3-risk teardown of your product’s public trust surface, privacy claims, collection defaults, and launch-risk gaps.
CA$250 — 48-hour delivery
- • Executive verdict and top 3 trust risks
- • Evidence references or screenshots
- • Why each risk matters and buyer-facing consequence
- • First fix and recommended next path (stop / full review / fix sprint)
- • Packaged as a polished brief (PDF/Markdown) with one-line quote
The brief is a delivery artifact, not informal notes — ready to share with buyers or internal stakeholders.
Use this when you need signal quickly and a shareable artifact to move the conversation forward.
Full review
The deeper audit for products where data handling, product behavior, and buyer scrutiny all matter.
Starting at CA$1,200
- • Threat model snapshot
- • Data boundary map
- • Collection and retention review
- • Product claims review
- • Risk-ranked fix roadmap
- • Proof gaps and buyer scrutiny notes
Use this when you need the full map of what is risky, what is sloppy, and what to fix first.
Fix Sprint
Implementation support for the highest-value corrections.
Starting at CA$1,500
- • Patch privacy or UX copy
- • Tighten data collection boundaries
- • Improve export, deletion, recovery, or consent flows
- • Add verification notes or tests where practical
- • Ship the highest-leverage corrections first
Use this when the problems are already known and you want them fixed fast.
Where CrisisCore Fits
This is the pre-audit product risk layer.
CrisisCore is not a compliance automation platform, law firm, or pentest replacement.
It sits earlier: before SOC 2 evidence collection, before HIPAA hosting decisions, before enterprise questionnaires, and before risky defaults harden into expensive architecture.
I review the product itself: what it collects, what it assumes, what it stores, what it shares, what breaks under pressure, and what a skeptical buyer will question first.
- • The product works, but the trust model feels wrong
- • You are unsure whether collection, consent, export, deletion, or recovery flows are defensible
- • You need to know whether to fix the product before buying compliance machinery
- • You want product behavior reviewed, not just paperwork
Proof
Real product changes, not hand-wavy claims
Proof shows concrete changes in product behavior, data handling, and public claims that can be defended.
Sensitive logging stayed local by default, sharing became explicit, and failure states became easier for users to recover from.
Internal R&D trust case showing how security claims were narrowed to what the release process could actually prove, then used to strengthen external client-facing review method.
A flagship case study and a redacted artifact from a real engagement.
Who This Fits
- • Health app founders before launch or partner review
- • AI tools handling sensitive prompts, outputs, or logs
- • Legal-tech products facing buyer or procurement scrutiny
- • Wellness apps collecting intimate behavioral data
- • Idea-stage product brainstorming
- • Generic pentest replacement expectations
- • Compliance theater with no appetite for product change
- • Teams without an owner, budget, or decision path
How It Starts
1. Send the link, stage, and deadline
Keep it short: product link, launch stage, and one clear concern.
2. I look for the issues most likely to cause damage
Not a checklist pass. I prioritize by impact on buyers, legal exposure, and launch risk.
3. You get a short written readout
Issues ranked by severity, with the first fix for each. No padding, no slide deck.
Get your 3-point risk read.
Free fit check. Not an audit. I'll tell you whether the 48-hour teardown, a full review, a fix sprint, or no engagement makes sense.