Firmware Readiness Review
A structured read of where your connected product stands against CRA, PSTI, RED and customer-audit expectations — before someone external reads it for you.
- Risk map
- Ownership gaps
- Evidence priorities
Talltree® Technologies
TallTree helps connected-product teams make secure boot, OTA, SBOM, vulnerability handling and support-period decisions inspectable — before a regulator, customer or buyer opens the file.
What teams come to us with
The engineering is usually real. The evidence is usually scattered. We close the gap before someone external opens the file.
Our product ships into the EU in 2027 — we don't know what the technical file is supposed to look like.
A customer security team sent us 180 questions about firmware update integrity. We can answer maybe 40 with confidence.
The buyer wants to see the SBOM tied to the released binary, the support-period commitment, and proof of the rollback path. We have most of that, somewhere.
How we engage
Every engagement produces named risks, owned decisions, and an evidence trail tied to a specific release.
A structured read of where your connected product stands against CRA, PSTI, RED and customer-audit expectations — before someone external reads it for you.
Turn scattered engineering knowledge — boot, OTA, SBOM, vulnerability handling, support windows — into a defensible technical file tied to specific releases.
Identify the architectural, integration and lifecycle risks in a connected product that are likely to surface late — at certification, in the field, or under acquisition diligence.
Flagship writing
Five pieces for firmware and engineering leaders preparing connected products for CRA, PSTI, RED, customer audit or acquisition diligence.
The point of view behind TallTree: compliance is engineering made inspectable, not paperwork bolted on at the end.
Cyber Resilience Act Annex I translated into firmware architecture, release process, field telemetry and evidence for connected-product teams.
A fictional but realistic 13-page report for a connected-lighting manufacturer — the structure, tone and specificity of a serious engagement.
An anonymised firmware lesson about OTA rollback, field recovery and why evidence built before panic is different from evidence assembled after it.
Five decision questions for connected-product engineering leaders deciding whether the first CRA cycle should be internal or externally supported.
Frequently asked
No. TallTree is independent advisory. We sit between firmware engineering and the people who will read your evidence — regulators, customers, buyers, insurers — and make sure the work in the file matches the work in the product.
Connected-product teams shipping firmware on Linux, RTOS or bare-metal targets, preparing for the EU Cyber Resilience Act, UK PSTI, Radio Equipment Directive cybersecurity articles, customer security questionnaires, cyber-insurance reviews or acquisition diligence.
Most engagements start with a Product Security Readiness Call. From there we usually run a Readiness Review (1–2 weeks), an Evidence Sprint (3–6 weeks tied to a release) or a Launch Risk Review timed against your certification or shipment date.
Where the engineering exists and the gap is articulation, yes. Where the engineering itself is incomplete — for example, no tested rollback path, no signed boot chain, no support-period commitment — we say so. A polished file over weak engineering is not what serious readers want.
If your team is preparing for CRA, PSTI, RED, a customer audit, diligence review or launch deadline, the readiness call is the entry point.