The expensive mistakes in infrastructure are decisions, not typos. This is having someone senior look at the decision while it's still a decision — before it becomes a migration.

Onboarding: I read your architecture, pipelines and access model properly, once.

Ongoing: architecture and change review before significant things ship.

Async access through the month for questions and decisions, with calls where they help.

Monthly written report — what changed, what's exposed, and what to do next.

Architecture and change review — On significant changes, before they ship rather than after.

Async advisory — Questions answered through the month, in whichever channel your team already uses.

Monthly posture report — Written. What changed, what's exposed, what to do next — usable in a board or customer conversation.

Continuity — I hold the context, so you're not re-explaining your system at the start of every engagement.

A named point of contact

Access to the repositories and cloud accounts in scope

Willingness to loop me in before decisions, not after

Handover is always included. You keep the code, the documentation and the runbooks — the point is that your team can operate this without me.

I work across GCP, AWS and Azure, and most of my recent work has been in regulated fintech, so compliance-shaped requirements (SAMA CSF, PCI-DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001) are familiar rather than an add-on.