How We Work at SIRI Law LLP
At SIRI Law LLP, we offer a modular set of services delivered within a unified governance framework. In practice, clients can mix and match cybersecurity, compliance, and legal offerings – but every engagement is governed by one integrated control structure. This means even a “cyber-only” project is still legally scoped, evidence-aware, and overseen by senior partners. Industry experts agree that compliance and cybersecurity must work closely together in order to manage risk effectively. Our core principle is: services are flexible, but governance is never decentralized.
Service Entry Types
Cybersecurity-Only Engagement
Clients request purely technical security services (e.g. penetration testing, red teaming, AI/LLM security assessments, cloud/network audits).
Cybersecurity + Legal Engagement
Clients need security work together with legal advice (e.g. incident response with legal risk management, security testing tied to contract terms, data breach investigations with counsel).
Cybersecurity + Compliance + Legal Engagement
Clients need security work together with legal advice (e.g. incident response with legal risk management, security testing tied to contract terms, data breach investigations with counsel).
Legal-Only Engagement (with Cybersecurity Support)
Primarily legal matters – such as transactions, litigation, employment issues or regulatory advice – handled with invisible but critical cybersecurity support.
Pure Legal Engagement
Traditional legal matters (family law, property disputes, non-digital litigation, etc.), still managed with high standards for documentation and partner oversight
Core Principle: Unified Governance
No matter how clients engage us, we apply one legal–cyber–compliance control framework. In practice, this means all work is subject to law firm governance: partners approve scopes, attorneys set evidence rules, and compliance requirements are identified up front. By unifying governance, we avoid the “free-for-all” risks of detached cybersecurity or compliance units. we “bundle the key elements of cybersecurity, governance, risk and compliance” into a single framework to manage risk effectively. This ensures that even specialized technical projects receive the same rigorous oversight as traditional legal matters.
Engagement Workflow by Type
A. Cybersecurity-Only Engagement
(Client wants testing, assessment, or security services only – e.g. penetration tests, red teams, cloud/AI security reviews.)
Although the client requests only technical work, we handle it as a legally governed operation. We first formalize the scope with legal counsel: authorizations, limits, and liability caps are set in writing. All evidence-handling rules are defined before the team begins. In fact, we treat the cybersecurity team as consultants acting under counsel’s direction. As one guidance explains, when outside counsel directs security testing, the results “become protected from compelled disclosure” under attorney‑client privilege. In other words, having lawyers supervise a pen‑test can shield its findings from adverse use.
Legal Oversight: Counsel drafts authorization letters, defines scope and liability boundaries, and establishes evidence-handling protocols.
Execution Flow: The cyber team performs the agreed tests under this oversight. Associates and senior associates ensure every step complies with the law. Logs and reports are validated internally, then elevated to a partner for final review.
Key Point: This is not a casual consulting gig – it’s a technical operation run with full legal discipline. Our partners sign off on every deliverable, and the entire process is designed so that the final report can be used defensibly in any legal or regulatory context.
B. Cybersecurity + Legal Engagement
(Client wants security services and legal advice or protection – e.g. breach response with counsel involvement, security testing linked to contract obligations, data breach investigations with legal oversight.)
These matters are co-owned by both practices. The legal team and cyber team collaborate from the outset to align their work. Legal counsel acts as “breach coach,” guiding the process to preserve privilege and manage risk, while forensic experts do the technical analysis. For example, industry experts note that it is standard for legal counsel to oversee incident response investigations, and that reports generated under their direction “are regularly classified as privileged”millerthomson.com. This ensures that technical findings can inform legal strategy without inadvertently waiving confidentiality.
Joint Leadership: A senior attorney and a senior cybersecurity expert are assigned to lead the matter together.
Legal Team: The lawyers preserve privilege, advise on disclosure obligations, regulatory compliance, and communication strategy. They design the investigation so that findings support the client’s legal defense.
Cyber Team: The security specialists carry out the approved investigation or testing, maintaining forensic integrity and chain-of-custody at all times.
Partner Oversight: The lead partner decides the firm’s legal posture (e.g. whether to disclose findings, how to remediate, litigation stance) and signs off on all reports or communications.
Key Point: Technical findings are filtered through legal strategy, not released raw. The cyber analysis serves the case plan defined by counsel.
C. Cybersecurity + Compliance + Legal Engagement
(Highest-maturity engagements combining security, regulatory compliance, and legal readiness – e.g. preparing for ISO 27001/GDPR, SOC 2 with contract reviews, PCI-DSS with litigation readiness.)
We treat compliance as a preventive legal defense. We start by mapping the relevant compliance framework (industry standards, regulations, and contracts). Our cybersecurity team then implements or tests controls to meet those requirements. Throughout, the legal team interprets the statutes and contractual obligations, preparing defenses and documentation in case of a challenge. In fact, experts emphasize that documented compliance procedures can significantly strengthen a company’s legal position: “Having procedures, audits, and records from a solid compliance system can strengthen the company’s position” in litigation or regulatory review.
Compliance Mapping: Identify which laws, regulations, and standards apply (e.g. ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, PCI).
Cybersecurity Support: The security team designs or tests controls that satisfy the compliance requirements (e.g. vulnerability scans for ISO gaps).
Legal Team: Lawyers map all relevant statutes and contract clauses, ensure regulatory obligations are met, and document the process defensively.
Deliverables: Final reports and materials are prepared to be audit-ready, court-ready, and regulator-ready. They include documented evidence of compliance steps, justifications, and legal analysis.
Key Point: We treat compliance not just as a checkbox, but as a built-in defense strategy. Robust compliance work becomes evidence of due diligence and good faith, bolstering the client’s position if scrutinized.
D. Legal-Only Engagement (with Cybersecurity Support)
(Traditional legal matters where the client asks for legal services, but SIRI Law adds hidden cybersecurity rigor – e.g. M&A transactions, litigation, employment disputes, regulatory advice.)
Even when the client is not explicitly paying for cyber work, our model remains powerful. The legal team, by habit, checks for any cybersecurity exposures or data issues in every case. If digital evidence or data integrity might be relevant, we deploy our tech resources quietly in the background. For instance, we may have IT forensics specialists verify e‑mail metadata or document authenticity before filing a brief. The client rarely sees this layer, but it protects the case from hidden risks.
Legal Review: Attorneys identify any digital risks – such as cybersecurity exposures, potential electronic evidence, or data integrity concerns – during case intake and strategy.
Cyber Backing: Our cybersecurity analysts may validate evidence, analyze metadata (timestamps, logs, code), or verify digital trails. They can also serve as technical experts behind the scenes.
Hidden Assistance: The cyber team typically assists internally. They do not appear on external scope or billing, but their input is integrated into legal deliverables.
Partner Oversight: As always, a partner is ultimately responsible for the case. They ensure that any cyber support appropriately serves the legal strategy.
Key Point: The client’s engagement remains “legal only,” but our lawyers never let digital issues go unchecked. The invisible cyber layer strengthens the legal case without complicating the client relationship.
E. Pure Legal Engagement
(Traditional matters with little or no digital component – e.g. simple family law, minor property disputes, non-digital litigation.)
Even here, SIRI Law applies enhanced standards. Before proceeding, we still assess any possible digital angle (e.g. existence of emails, records, metadata). We enforce strict documentation and evidence standards, and require partner review of all outputs. This ensures that even straightforward legal tasks benefit from our disciplined approach.
Digital Risk Check: We verify whether any digital evidence might unexpectedly matter (for example, email chains in a family law case).
Documentation Standards: We apply consistent templates, audit trails, and record-keeping to every matter.
Partner Sign-Off: Every significant document or decision is reviewed by a partner before delivery.
Key point: Even in low-tech cases, our integrated approach ensures quality, consistency, and defensibility.
Proposal-Driven Service Activation
We never start work ad hoc. Each engagement begins with a formal proposal (or statement of work) that defines everything in advance. This document explicitly activates the necessary service layers (cyber, compliance, legal), assigns leadership, and sets rules of engagement. In effect, the proposal becomes the law of the engagement.
A well-crafted SOW or proposal outlines the activated services, deliverables, timeline, and responsibilities for all partieslegal.thomsonreuters.com. It sets mutual expectations and prevents misunderstandings. For example, Thomson Reuters explains that a statement of work “outlines the services, deliverables, and expectations between two parties” and ensures transparency via “clear communication protocols between both sides”legal.thomsonreuters.com.
The proposal identifies which service layers are required (e.g. cyber testing, compliance audit, legal advice).
It names the lead attorneys and technologists who will oversee the work.
It defines authority limits and liability (e.g. scopes, waivers, approvals required).
It specifies evidence and documentation standards (how data will be collected, retained, and reported).
By requiring client and firm sign-off on this proposal, we ensure clarity from day one. In short: Client request ≠ final scope until the proposal is agreed. The signed proposal is what actually governs the engagement.
Case Routing Logic
SIRI Law’s internal workflow is best understood as a strict pipeline. Every matter flows through these steps:
Intake & Request: A client inquiry is formally logged.
Classification: We categorize the engagement into one of the five types above (A–E).
Proposal Drafting: Based on that classification, a detailed proposal/SOW is prepared, outlining scope, teams, and governance.
Service Activation: Upon approval, the designated layers (cyber, compliance, legal) and team leads are officially activated.
Controlled Execution: Work is performed under the agreed legal-cyber oversight – cyber teams report to counsel, associates escalate issues, and compliance tasks follow the plan.
Partner Sign-off: Before any report or client deliverable is issued, the responsible partner reviews and approves the final work product.
At no point do junior cyber analysts or associates act without supervision or go beyond the defined scope. Nothing is released or disclosed outside of this chain of command. This routing logic guarantees that every step is accountable and aligned with firm policy.
Why This System Creates Discipline
Our rigorous model instills discipline and protects clients:
Every engagement has a legal spine: No project proceeds without attorney involvement. This ensures all cyber work serves a broader legal strategy.
Cybersecurity is never “free roaming”: Technicians always have a defined role and oversight. They never act on speculation or incomplete authority.
Compliance is proactive defense: By building in compliance from the start, we help clients avoid liability. In fact, having a robust compliance program can itself strengthen the client’s position in any future disputetheworldlawgroup.com.
Partners retain ultimate responsibility: Senior lawyers are accountable for outcomes, which maintains quality and consistency firm-wide.
Consistent, defensible delivery: Each report is prepared as if it might be used in court or audit – not just as an informal summary. The high standard of documentation and sign-off makes our work reliable and repeatable.
Because “governance never varies,” clients get the benefit of our multi-disciplinary skill set without sacrificing the reliability of traditional law firm practice.
“At SIRI Law LLP, services vary — but governance never does.”
This guiding maxim captures our approach: whatever the mix of services, the rigor of our oversight is always the same. We hold ourselves to the highest professional standards in every engagement – partner-led, thoroughly documented, and defensibly executed.