Cloud-Native Consulting Engines: CNCF CKS Certified
The search says CKS audit, and the distinguishing variable is staff counts. A firm claiming CKS certification without named holders can schedule anyone onto your engagement; the directory aggregates firms with documented, verified CKS staff counts in real time.
Below: CKS-certified benches filtered further by the two capabilities that determine audit depth, Infrastructure-as-Code scanning and runtime security tool support.
What renders on this page
- ▸Real-time aggregation of firms with documented CKS staff counts
- ▸Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) scanning capabilities (Terraform, Helm)
- ▸Runtime security tool support (Falco, eBPF: Tetragon, Tracee, Cilium)
- ▸Direct "Request Secure RFP" form pre-wired to the Cloud-Native template
Why staff counts beat certification logos
CKS certifies individuals, so a firm is exactly as CKS-capable as its roster on the week of your engagement. The aggregation shows named holder counts per firm (verified against CNCF certification records) with platform experience (EKS, GKE, AKS, self-managed) so the certified bench matches your cluster footprint.
IaC scanning in the audit
Most cluster risk is codified before it runs: Terraform and Helm define your privileges, policies, and images. Firms that audit IaC directly find the misconfiguration class at pull-request time (the cheapest point in the lifecycle) and their matrices record which IaC tooling they scan natively.
Runtime tooling that holds up in an incident
Falco for syscall-level rules, eBPF telemetry (Tetragon, Tracee) where audit logs are insufficient, Cilium where network enforcement must be kernel-level. The tooling matrix shows which firms deploy which tools, and directory case records show them used to reconstruct real attack paths, not installed as shelfware.
Request a secure RFP
The Cloud-Native RFP template captures clusters, nodes, managed services, workload profile, and existing tooling. CKS-certified firms respond with standardized proposals you can compare on staffing, tooling, and price, no discovery calls required to get there.
What cncf cks kubernetes security audit engagements typically cost, and what drives the price
No honest page quotes a single number, because the price of cncf cks kubernetes security audit work varies by scope. The drivers that move quotes are cluster count and configuration sprawl, ten identical managed clusters and a hundred snowflake clusters are different engagements, pipeline exposure: CI/CD, registries, and admission controllers multiply the attack surface being assessed, and the depth of work: a point-in-time audit, a hardening program, or continuous security coverage each price differently. For real numbers, use the verified directory's disclosed rate data and structured RFP responses from Kubernetes-security consultancies.
How long it takes
A cluster security audit is typically a bounded engagement of days-to-weeks per cluster set, gated more by change-control windows than consultant availability.
Hardening programs run longer because they sequence through admission policies, network policies, and pipeline changes that teams must absorb.
Supply-chain (SBOM, image signing) work runs at your release cadence, it is a process change, not a project.
What to prepare before you engage a firm
The firms you are about to compare will scope faster (and quote more accurately) if you arrive with a cluster inventory with versions, distributions, and hosting arrangements (managed vs self-hosted), current network policies, RBAC configuration, and admission-controller setup, your CI/CD layout: where images build, sign, and deploy from, and SBOM tooling status, what exists today and where the gaps are.
Common mistakes to avoid when choosing
treating cluster security as node hardening only, the API server, RBAC, and admission chain are where cluster-level compromise happens
auditing clusters that are about to be rebuilt or migrated, fix the lifecycle first, then the security posture
buying point-in-time audits for an environment that changes weekly without any continuous validation in between
What happens after you engage
A well-run cncf cks kubernetes security audit engagement follows a predictable arc: a scoping pass that maps your clusters and pipelines into an assessment boundary, then the technical work (configuration review, policy gaps, pipeline and supply-chain exposure) with findings ranked by exploitability, then a remediation sequence your platform team can actually absorb, with policy templates rather than just findings, and finally for continuous engagements: detection and validation that keeps pace with your release cadence. If a firm cannot describe this arc for your environment, that itself is a finding.
Frequently asked questions
How many CKS holders should a firm have?
Enough to cover your engagement window with scheduling slack: small verified benches (3–8 engineers) work for scoped audits; platform teams running 24/7 workloads should look at 15+ responder benches. The aggregation makes the tradeoff visible per firm.
Is a CKS audit different from a CIS Benchmark audit?
Related but not identical: CIS Benchmarks describe configuration baselines; CKS-certified audits cover hardening, admission control, minimization, and runtime security as an integrated engagement. Many verified firms run benchmark-anchored audits with CKS-certified staff, both are filterable.
Do we need eBPF forensics for an audit, or only for incidents?
For audits, eBPF tooling matters as evidence capability: if an incident happens during or after the engagement, syscall-level telemetry is what makes timelines defensible. The runtime tool support filter shows which firms deploy it as standard practice.
How much does a Kubernetes security audit cost?
Cost tracks cluster count and sprawl, pipeline exposure, and depth (the drivers above) so quotes are scope-specific by nature. The verified directory lists cloud-native security firms with disclosed rate data where available, and structured RFP responses return real quotes.
Is CKS certification worth it when hiring?
It evidences individual depth on Kubernetes security specifics, which is why the directory surfaces certified staffing where firms disclose it, but certification is one signal alongside casework and platform experience, not a substitute for either.