Faro Meridian is an early-stage company building an AI-assisted narrative-intelligence and institutional-risk product. We’re looking for an experienced Azure and/or GitHub professional to validate existing evidence, resolve priority technical unknowns, and help us make safe, practical decisions.
This is a focused assessment of an existing Azure and GitHub environment, as we have already completed an initial Azure cost baseline, configuration review, and conservative resource assessment. We have configuration notes, utilization evidence, cost observations, and handover context to share.
We welcome one consultant covering both workstreams or coordinated specialists with clearly separated responsibilities.
What you’ll review:
Azure evidence validation
Review two priority Azure resources—MySQL Flexible Server and an Ubuntu worker VM—with emphasis on cost, security, dependencies, and recovery readiness.
For MySQL lifecycle planning, identify the current exposure, verification prerequisites, and next decision needed. A full compatibility assessment or upgrade plan is not required.
For VM recovery, identify what is documented, what remains unverified, and the smallest appropriate next verification step. A detailed rebuild procedure or recovery-test plan is not required.
Bounded GitHub review
Review an agreed organization and repository inventory against a defined checklist covering:
•Founder ownership, administrative continuity, and recovery readiness.
• Members, teams, outside collaborators, and relevant permissions.
• Repository visibility, branch protections or rulesets, and bypass permissions.
• Available security settings and secrets-management configuration, without viewing secret values.
• Relevant Actions permissions, deployment environments, and installed integrations.
This is a targeted governance/configuration review—not a comprehensive security audit or source-code review.
Shared dependency check
Where integrations exist, identify the GitHub–Azure connections relevant to deployment, access, or recovery. Produce a concise map of verified connections, authentication methods, permission dependencies, and documentation gaps using permitted metadata, redacted evidence, or founder-guided walkthroughs.
Do not assume integrations exist or reconstruct the entire deployment architecture.
Deliverables and completion criteria:
Provide Airtable-ready records for material findings and proposed actions, with evidence references, risks, and next decisions.
Provide a concise findings report, prioritized recommendations, and a written handoff. Detailed deliverables and acceptance criteria will be agreed before work begins.
Boundaries and deferred work:
This is a read-only assessment; implementation and ongoing maintenance are excluded. Access will be limited and agreed in advance. No shared credentials, secret values, private source code, or sensitive application/database data will be provided. Any future changes require separate scope and written founder approval recorded in Airtable.
Use redacted evidence and founder-guided walkthroughs where necessary. If a question cannot be answered safely, document the limitation and propose the smallest additional verification step.
The following require separate scopes and are not included:
• Full MySQL compatibility testing or upgrade planning.
• Detailed VM rebuild/recovery procedures.
• Recovery-test design or execution.
• Comprehensive GitHub security auditing or application-code review.
• Full runbook development or ongoing monthly maintenance.
• Implementation, remediation, deployment, or configuration changes.
• Commitment-purchase analysis, automated shutdown, enforcement policies, or spending-blocking controls.
Experience, terms, and application:
For the Azure workstream, demonstrate relevant experience with MySQL Flexible Server, Linux VMs, networking, RBAC, monitoring, backup/recovery assessment, and Cost Management.
For the GitHub workstream, demonstrate organization administration, ownership continuity, repository permissions/protections, security settings, and Actions/deployment permissions.
Experience assessing GitHub–Azure dependencies is valuable for the shared review. Please identify any limits to your coverage.
We value clear writing, careful judgment, and comfort working with incomplete documentation. “Keep the current configuration” is an acceptable recommendation. There is no savings target, and security or recovery findings should not be presented as cost savings.
Commercial terms:
• One-time, fixed-scope remote engagement.
• Fixed fee preferred; capped hours considered, with no unapproved overage.
• Effort, fee, and completion date agreed after reviewing the evidence pack and confirming the GitHub inventory.
• No ongoing retainer or implementation commitment required.
• One kickoff and one final handoff, with consolidated asynchronous questions between them.
• Indicative budget: $600, subject to confirmation of the agreed inventory, deliverables, and exclusions.
• Target completion: 3–5 business days after evidence and access are available, subject to agreed scope and consultant availability.
Please include:
• Whether you cover Azure, GitHub, or both.
• A brief relevant example for each proposed workstream.
• Your availability and indicative fixed fee or capped-hours estimate, broken down by workstream and shared review.
• What existing evidence you expect to reuse and what requires fresh verification.
• Assumptions, exclusions, access requirements, and scope limits.
Sanitized examples or short descriptions are sufficient; please do not share confidential client material.
We’re looking for a thoughtful technical partner who can validate our environment, identify what matters next, and keep the work proportionate to a small company’s needs.
