Paths to client matter data
Correlate public exposure, identity edges, and findings into ranked paths that reach a store of privileged client data.
See every path that could reach privileged client data
Trident maps the assets, identities, and data stores that hold privileged matter data, then correlates exposure and pentest findings into the paths that could reach a client file.
Privileged matter graph
Client portalPublic surface
Workload identityInherited access
Matter 8F21Privileged documents
Discovery archiveRestricted data
Verified pathOne control closes the route
Capabilities
One graph from exposure to client data
Map where privileged data lives and every path that could reach it. Each route is ranked by real risk and tied to a fix.
Know where matter data lives
Inventory every data store and the identities that can reach it, then explore blast radius outward from any asset.
Matter & tenant isolation
Pentests exercise broken access control and tenant isolation, so one client’s documents can’t bleed into another’s.
Evidence for SOC 2
Track SOC 2 posture against the same graph, with each control gap tied to the path it actually opens.
Ranked by reach to client files
Findings are prioritized by proximity to privileged data, so the shortest list reflects the highest real risk.
Fixes for the owning team
Each path ships its choke-point fix as a draft PR or copy-paste runbook. Every change is human-reviewed.
How it works
From read-only role to a closed path
01
Connect read-only
Attach read-only roles. Trident inventories assets, identities, and the stores that hold client data.
02
Locate the matters
Data stores and the identities reaching them resolve into one queryable graph.
03
Correlate the paths
Exposure, identity, and pentest findings collapse into ranked paths to privileged data.
04
Close the chain
Each path ships its single choke-point fix to the team that owns it.
Outcomes
Protect the matter, prove the control
Stop chasing standalone alerts. Focus on the paths that actually reach privileged client data.
Matter-aware
Data-path context
Tenant-focused
Isolation testing
Evidence-led
Finding review
Retested
After remediation
Scope
Where confidentiality boundaries fail
One raw query bypassing the tenant scope applied everywhere else is the canonical defect in this sector.
What legaltech testing prioritizes
Legal software holds material that is privileged, and a confidentiality failure between two clients is not merely a security incident — it can be a conflict of interest and an ethical exposure for the firm using the product. Trident concentrates on tenant isolation and document-level authorization: whether any request path lets one matter, firm, or client reach another’s material.
- Tenant isolation
- Whether firm and client boundaries hold across every route, including reporting, export, and administrative paths that were built after the main authorization model and often bypass it.
- Document-level authorization
- Access to individual documents, matters, and case files by direct identifier, including documents shared, unshared, or moved between matters where the revocation may never have propagated.
- Ethical wall enforcement
- Whether conflict-of-interest screens implemented in the product actually prevent retrieval, or merely hide material from the interface while leaving it reachable through the API.
- Search and indexing leakage
- Whether search results, autocomplete, previews, or notifications disclose the existence or content of material the requesting user cannot open — a leak that is invisible in access logs.
- Retention and deletion
- Whether deleted material is genuinely unreachable across primary stores, backups, exports, and search indexes, given the retention obligations legal work carries.
Frequently asked
Questions teams ask before they start
How do you test tenant isolation properly?
With at least two accounts in genuinely separate tenants, exercising every route with identifiers belonging to the other. Single-tenant testing cannot detect cross-tenant flaws at all, which is why they survive so many engagements and are so often found later by a customer.
Do you access real client documents?
No. Testing uses synthetic matters and documents in test tenants. Proving that a cross-tenant path exists requires two test tenants, not privileged material, and introducing real client data would create risk without improving the finding.
What about the ethical walls our customers configure?
Those are tested as an authorization control like any other: the question is whether the screen prevents retrieval through every path, or only removes material from the interface. Screens enforced at the presentation layer but not in the API are a recurring finding.
Can this support our customers’ security questionnaires?
Yes. Scope, methodology, findings, remediation, and retest evidence covers most of what enterprise legal buyers ask for. Some require an independent assessor’s report as well, which is a separate engagement from testing.
Know what can reach a client file.
Connect a read-only role and see the ranked paths to your privileged data through a read-only connection, with evidence for each path.