Vrinik’s deepest playbook is built inside licensed Payment Service Providers — designing the controls that banking partners, regulators, and enterprise customers actually accept as evidence. Not policies. Proof.
In most industries, security is a programme to invest in. In payments, it is the condition of being in business at all.
Every counterparty — the banking partner, the card scheme, the regulator, the enterprise customer — holds the authority to refuse to do business until trust is established. None of them accept policies as evidence. All of them want to see the controls actually work, evidenced over time, and reviewed by someone with the authority to act on findings.
Most FinTech businesses meet this dynamic for the first time at a specific moment. A banking partner pauses go-live pending a security review. A card scheme tightens its requirements. The FCA writes about something the team did not know was a finding. An enterprise prospect’s vendor risk team sends a 200-question questionnaire that no one in the building has the authority to answer.
At that moment, the cost is no longer theoretical. Banking integrations pause. Sales cycles stall. Acquirer due diligence introduces conditions. The board asks why something everyone assumed was handled was not.
The work Vrinik does is to remove that moment from the table — by making the business audit-ready before anyone audits it, evidence-ready before anyone asks, and regulator-ready before any regulator writes.
Six predictable moments turn FinTech security from a back-office programme into a commercial question. Each carries a real cost when the business is not ready for it.
Open Banking integrations, BaaS partnerships, and payment rails all require demonstrated security controls before launch. A partner questionnaire — typically 150 to 300 questions — can delay a go-live by weeks or months when the business has no documented programme to draw from.
Regulatory scrutiny in payments has tightened year over year. The FCA, PRA, and PSR ask sharper questions about operational resilience, customer money safeguarding, and cyber controls. Having policies is not the same as having evidence the controls work — and the regulator already knows the difference.
Larger customers — the ones that move the needle commercially — run formal vendor risk assessments before signing. Without a CISO-level function, these reviews stall because the answers are inconsistent, incomplete, or signal a programme that does not exist.
PCI DSS is not a one-time achievement. The scheme audit asks not just whether controls exist, but whether they are operating as designed, evidenced over time, and reviewed by someone with the authority to act on findings.
Acquirer due diligence in payments looks past the financials. Security gaps surface here — often late in the process — and produce escrow holdbacks, valuation adjustments, or close the deal entirely.
EMI, PI, and money transmitter applications include security as a substantive review item. Variations to existing permissions — new product categories, new geographies — trigger fresh security scrutiny that catches programmes designed for the original scope.
FinTech security work is not a generic programme applied to a regulated business. The frameworks, the evidence formats, the regulator’s reading lens, the scheme’s expectations — these are specific. Vrinik builds for the specificity.
A structured review of the cardholder data environment, scope reduction where possible, control design and evidence collection — with everything formatted the way a QSA expects to see it. Then the ongoing rhythm that keeps the certification valid year after year.
Regulator-ready documentation of the security programme — policies, risk registers, control testing, incident records, board reporting — presented in the format regulators recognise and ask for. Built so that the next regulatory question is already answered.
Vrinik owns the questionnaire process end-to-end. Consistent, accurate, board-reportable answers. Coordinated responses across multiple banking and BaaS partners. No more answering the same question three different ways across three different partner reviews.
Architecture and controls for Strong Customer Authentication, third-party provider access, API security, and customer data handling — designed against the actual regulatory text, not a generic API security pattern lifted from a different sector.
Visa, Mastercard, and acquirer scheme requirements translated into a continuous control programme that survives the audit and the year that follows it — not a one-time compliance scramble.
The security controls that sit underneath KYC, transaction monitoring, and sanctions screening — designed so the AML programme has actual integrity, not just paperwork that satisfies the first audit and falls apart on the second.
The guidance here is not theoretical. These are controls personally designed and implemented inside licensed Payment Service Providers — which is why Vrinik already knows where the gaps sit, what auditors test for, what holds up under regulatory scrutiny, and what enterprise procurement teams actually accept as evidence.
The difference between an advisor who can describe a control and a practitioner who has implemented one inside a regulated payments business shows up at exactly the moments that matter — the questionnaire that has to be defended, the regulator’s follow-up letter, the partner review that has to clear before launch. Vrinik writes for those moments because Vrinik has lived them.
In payments, the question is never whether the security is good enough. It is whether it is provable. The work is to put the proof in the room before anyone has to ask for it.— Sandeep Makol, Founder
Tell us where the programme stands. The first conversation will establish the likely shape of the problem, where to direct attention first, and whether Vrinik is the right firm for the work.
Request a consultation