Frequently asked questions

We are a UK-based Microsoft-certified consultancy focused on Azure. We design and deliver landing zones, cloud security, DevSecOps, cost optimisation, advisory engagements, and ongoing managed operations. Clients are typically regulated enterprises - financial services, public sector, legal, retail - where security, compliance, and reliability are non-negotiable.

Most clients are Tier-1 and mid-market organisations in regulated sectors: financial services (banks, asset managers), public sector bodies, legal firms, and retail businesses. We are comfortable at enterprise scale but equally effective with smaller organisations needing senior input without a large delivery team. The common thread is workloads where getting Azure wrong has real operational or regulatory consequences.

Yes - our architects hold current Microsoft certifications across Azure platform, security, and DevOps disciplines. In practical terms, that means our designs are validated against Microsoft reference architectures, we get early access to Microsoft engineering guidance, and we know when to escalate through Microsoft support for genuinely difficult problems rather than spending client time re-discovering answers.

We are based in the United Kingdom and deliver primarily for UK clients, though we work comfortably with multinational organisations whose UK entity is the point of engagement. Delivery is usually remote with on-site presence where security clearances, workshops, or critical incidents require it. Data handling and residency follow UK and EU regulations by default.

The contact page is the fastest route - a short message describing your current situation (migrating to Azure, reviewing an existing platform, dealing with a specific problem) and we will come back within one working day to set up an initial discussion. First conversations are free, short, and under no obligation. We will tell you honestly whether we can help or whether someone else is better placed.

We focus narrowly on Azure and the Microsoft cloud stack rather than spreading across every cloud and every technology. Depth over breadth. Every senior engineer has Microsoft certifications and real delivery experience at enterprise scale. We do not staff engagements with people learning on the client's time, and we do not take on work that sits outside what we are genuinely expert in.

A small, senior team of Azure architects, cloud security specialists, and DevSecOps engineers - each with years of delivery in regulated environments. We are deliberately right-sized rather than scaled-for-sales: engagements are led by the people who actually understand your environment, not handed off to junior delivery teams after the pitch. If you want to know who will be doing the work, ask on the first call.

Yes. Our case studies page covers anonymised engagements across financial services, public sector, legal, and retail - landing zones, security hardening, FinOps, identity modernisation, and platform migrations. For named references, we arrange introductions directly with clients who have agreed to act as referees. These are typically available once an engagement is being seriously discussed.

Rosebud Cloud Solutions was built specifically for Azure platform delivery, and the team's collective Azure experience goes back to the platform's early enterprise adoption. Several team members have been building on Azure since before ARM templates, which means we have seen which patterns age well and which collapse under scale. That perspective shapes every design decision we make.

Short answer: if you need senior, independent Azure expertise and want engineers rather than a sales team, we are probably a good fit. If you need a generalist cloud consultancy covering AWS, GCP, and everything else, we are not. Our how-we-work page explains the engagement model in more detail, and a 30-minute call is the fastest way to find out if we match your situation.

An Azure Landing Zone is the foundational platform that sits beneath your workloads - management groups, subscriptions, policy, network topology, identity, and logging, all configured to Microsoft's Cloud Adoption Framework. If you plan to run more than a handful of workloads in Azure, building a landing zone early prevents the sprawl, inconsistency, and control gaps that are significantly harder to fix later.

The Cloud Adoption Framework (CAF) is the methodology - the full set of guidance for adopting Azure responsibly. A landing zone is one of its outputs: the concrete platform that encodes CAF principles into management groups, policies, networking, and identity. We design and deploy landing zones as the tangible implementation of CAF, not as a theoretical reference.

Yes, though the approach differs from a greenfield build. We start by mapping what is already in place - subscriptions, policies, network layout, identity - then design a target landing zone and a migration path that brings existing workloads into it in phases. It is slower than starting fresh, but avoids the disruption of rebuilding production workloads from scratch.

We use Infrastructure-as-Code for every deployment, typically Terraform or Bicep depending on client preference and existing tooling. The landing zone, policies, and baseline resources live in a Git repository with proper change control. This means the platform is reproducible, auditable, and evolvable - no click-ops configuration sitting in the portal.

A standard enterprise-scale landing zone takes four to eight weeks to design and deploy, depending on complexity and decision-making pace. Smaller or single-region environments can complete in two to four weeks. Timelines are dominated by architectural decisions - network topology, identity strategy, policy posture - rather than the deployment itself, which is largely automated once decisions are made.

Yes - that is much of the point. Management groups, Azure Policy, and RBAC are configured at the group level so new subscriptions inherit the same guardrails by default. Adding a subscription becomes a declarative action rather than a manual checklist. Policies enforce allowed regions, resource types, tagging, encryption, and logging before any workload team touches the environment.

DevSecOps means security controls are built into the delivery pipeline itself, not layered on afterwards. In Azure, that typically covers automated policy enforcement, secret management through Key Vault, vulnerability scanning of code and container images, infrastructure-as-code validation, and compliance checks before anything reaches production. Security becomes a property of the pipeline rather than a separate review step.

DevOps focuses on delivery speed and automation; DevSecOps keeps those goals but embeds security as a first-class concern at every stage. Practically, that means security tooling runs automatically alongside build and deployment - shifting detection left so issues are caught by developers at commit time rather than by security teams weeks later. Same speed, higher confidence.

We work with Azure DevOps and GitHub Actions as primary platforms, which covers most Azure-centric teams. The patterns we implement - pipeline-as-code, policy gates, artifact scanning - are portable, so the same approach translates to other platforms if you change toolchains later. We do not mandate a specific stack; we adapt to what your team already uses.

Secrets live in Azure Key Vault and are injected at runtime using workload identity federation or managed identities - never stored in pipeline variables, repository files, or config. Pipelines authenticate to Azure without long-lived credentials, access is scoped to the minimum required, and every secret access is logged. This removes the category of leaked-credentials incidents almost entirely.

Standard coverage includes static code analysis, dependency scanning for known CVEs in open-source libraries, container image scanning, infrastructure-as-code validation against Azure Policy, and secret scanning to catch credentials committed by mistake. Results are gated - a pipeline with critical findings cannot promote to production without an explicit, logged override.

We integrate with what you have wherever possible. Most engagements start by reviewing existing pipelines and adding security stages incrementally - a scan here, a policy gate there - so teams keep shipping while the controls mature. Full rebuilds are only necessary when the existing pipelines are fundamentally unsuitable, which is rare.

It covers ongoing operations of your Azure environment: 24/7 monitoring, incident response, patching, backup and recovery, security posture management, cost oversight, and regular platform improvements. The goal is a stable, continuously-improving platform without your team having to carry the operational weight in-house. Scope is defined per client so you pay for what you actually need.

Traditional MSPs often operate a ticket-and-fix model - incident happens, someone reacts. Our approach is engineering-led: we improve the platform continuously so incidents happen less often, automate remediation where it is safe, and treat each incident as a signal to make the environment more resilient. You get operations support plus platform evolution, not just break-fix.

Response-time SLAs are tiered by severity: critical production incidents within 15 minutes, major within one hour, and routine within one business day. Resolution targets depend on the nature of the issue and the client's environment, so we set them explicitly per engagement rather than making generic promises. SLAs are reported monthly and tied to service credits where appropriate.

Either model works. Some clients use us to run the whole platform; others keep an internal team and use us for out-of-hours cover, specialist input, or capacity during busy periods. The engagement model is set up explicitly at the start so ownership, escalation paths, and decision rights are clear - there is no ambiguity about who does what.

Yes - most managed engagements start with an environment that already exists. We begin with a discovery and onboarding phase to map the platform, identify risks, document runbooks, and align monitoring to our standards. Where we find significant issues, they are surfaced transparently with a remediation plan rather than absorbed silently into the service.

A dedicated on-call rota covers 24/7, with tiered escalation so the right engineer is paged for the right issue. Incidents are logged, investigated, and remediated with a written post-incident review for anything above routine severity. We do not use a generic service desk as the frontline; incidents go to engineers who know your environment from the start.