Skip to content

Project Nightwatch · Portfolio demonstration · Rachel Love

Ethical Hacking & Attack Surface Validation Lab

Authorized testing. Evidence-based findings. Actionable remediation.

This lab models how Rachel Love approaches an authorized security assessment from scope through retest: agreeing rules of engagement, inventorying the attack surface, validating each weakness with the minimum necessary interaction, reasoning about how moderate issues chain into real business risk, partnering on remediation, retesting against evidence, and reporting residual risk in language leadership can act on.

Executive KPIs

Synthetic engagement metrics from the Project Nightwatch lab. Counts reflect validated findings, not raw scanner output.

Assets in scope

8

Findings validated

12

Critical

1

High

3

Medium

5

Low

3

Remediated

9

Retest passed

9

Open attack paths

2

Risk analytics

Severity distribution, findings by asset class, remediation status, and the risk trend from initial validation through retest.

Severity distribution

Findings by asset class

Remediation status

  • Remediated / closed9 / 12 · 75%
  • In remediation2 / 12 · 17%
  • Open1 / 12 · 8%

Risk trend: initial validation → retest

Top validated findings

Highest-severity synthetic findings. Evidence is described in narrative form; no payloads are published.

IDFindingSeverityStatusRetest
EH-001Broken access control in synthetic admin workflowCriticalRemediatedPass
EH-002Overly broad permissions assigned to synthetic test roleHighRemediatedPass
EH-003Overly permissive network path between synthetic application and data tiersHighIn RemediationNot Retested
EH-004Insecure test upload validation on lab endpointHighRemediatedPass
EH-005Missing rate-limit control on lab authentication endpointMediumRemediatedPass

Assessment methodology

A defensible flow from authorization through executive reporting. Each stage produces an artifact the next stage depends on.

  1. 01

    Authorization & scope

    Confirm written authorization, agree rules of engagement, define in-scope assets, stop conditions, and the escalation path before any activity.

  2. 02

    Asset discovery

    Build an inventory of synthetic assets, owners, exposure, and authentication boundaries.

  3. 03

    Attack-surface analysis

    Group assets by trust zone and identify where the meaningful boundary transitions actually are.

  4. 04

    Validation

    Confirm each candidate weakness with the minimum non-destructive interaction needed, and record confidence honestly.

  5. 05

    Attack-path analysis

    Chain moderate findings to show where combined risk exceeds the sum of individual severities.

  6. 06

    Risk rating

    Rate on business impact and realistic exploitability, not scanner output.

  7. 07

    Remediation guidance

    Give owners specific, testable fixes plus compensating controls for the interim.

  8. 08

    Retest

    Re-validate against evidence. A change alone is not closure; the retest result decides.

  9. 09

    Executive reporting

    Communicate risk, decisions, and residual exposure in language leadership can act on.

Background & portfolio context

How this lab connects to Rachel's broader security work.

Coursework and reasoning basis

The methodology here draws on ethical-hacking coursework, security architecture reasoning, and hands-on lab practice against intentionally vulnerable environments. It reflects study and self-directed lab work — not a professional penetration-testing certification, and not a real-world client engagement. The emphasis is deliberately on the parts of the discipline that outlast any single technique: authorization, evidence quality, impact framing, remediation partnership, and retest discipline.

Portfolio card metadata

Role
Sole designer, security analyst, and full-stack engineer
Objective
Ethical hacking is often reduced to vulnerability discovery. The harder professional work is authorization, evidence quality, business-impact framing, remediation partnership, and retest discipline.
Outcome
A recruiter-reviewable engagement portal with 8 synthetic assets, 12 validated findings, 3 illustrative attack paths, a remediation and retest board, framework cross-references, and an export-ready final report.
Tools & technologies
React 19TanStack StartTypeScriptTailwind CSS v4shadcn/uiRechartsZodVitest