Technical due diligence
A membership platform's core still runs on ASP.NET Web Forms, unfunded since 2016
A membership and case-management platform for member-based organizations, its core built on ASP.NET Web Forms — a Microsoft framework tied to the older .NET Framework that's received no active feature investment since 2016. Technical due diligence for this pattern: $10,000–$25,000, one to three weeks, as a one-off read or a standing check across a roll-up.
What we find
The core platform is built on ASP.NET Web Forms, a Microsoft web framework tied to the older .NET Framework rather than the modern, cross-platform .NET line. Microsoft has put no active feature investment into Web Forms since 2016 — it still works, and it's still supported in the sense that it runs, but nothing new is coming to it, and the pool of engineers who choose to specialize in it gets smaller every year.
Why it matters for a PE holder
For a platform serving member-based organizations, the practical risk is less about a sudden failure and more about compounding drag: a shrinking, aging pool of Web Forms engineers to hire from, security patching that depends on an unmaintained framework rather than an actively developed one, and an architecture that makes every integration with a modern system — payments, SSO, a mobile app — harder than it needs to be. In a roll-up specifically, it also means this platform likely can't share infrastructure with a sibling acquisition built on something newer.
What the engagement checks
The diligence engagement sizes the migration and security exposure of a legacy Microsoft web framework — as a one-off read ahead of a single deal, or as a standing check run across every new acquisition in a roll-up, so the same question gets asked and answered the same way each time instead of once per deal team's instinct.
$10,000–$25,000, one to three weeks. We read what a target company's codebase, dependencies and infrastructure actually run, find the specific legacy-stack or security exposure it carries, and hand back a report scoped enough to become the remediation plan — if the deal proceeds and one is warranted.
This pattern is drawn from public research on a real, small software company, not a completed Shashtram engagement. Named engagements with measured figures replace it as clients clear being named.
One pattern, not the whole offer
This is one pattern. The full technical due diligence offer covers pricing, what the report contains, and answers to the questions PE operating partners actually ask.
Diligence is Map, scoped to one question and priced on its own — not a separate product, and never an assumed rewrite.
Questions
Straight answers.
What if we don't proceed to a rebuild after the report?
Then the report is what you paid for, and the engagement ends there. Nothing about the diligence commits you to a modernization project — most of the value in a $10,000–$25,000 read is knowing what you're actually buying, whether or not you act on it afterward.
Start here
Bring us one workflow.
Tell us the process that crosses the most systems. You get a scope, a measure and a delivery plan back — and a straight answer if we think it is not worth building.
Get in touch