Review of Exceptional Promise Application, Cyber Security

Hi everyone, thanks for all you do. I would appreciate if you guys can go through my evidence and please help review it.

I am looking to apply for the global talent visa (exceptional promise) in digital technology - Cyber Security.
I have picked OC2 and OC3 as the optional criteria.
LOR (1) from a professor of cybersecurity and also a co founder of a crypto inspired health coin (2) Letter from a well celebrated cyber security personality recognised in Africa and UK (3) Letter from a cofounder of a Fintech in Nigeria / USA.

Although I have more than 5 years in IT (as a backend software engineer, but only just started my career in cyber security in 2022) hence applying as a promise. States this in my personal statment.

For MC
Mc1: I lead the growth of a financial payment processing company Y in Nigeria, where I architect a novel security process.
(i) I talked about my contributions in helping the company retain compliance, remain in business, avert risks and increase revenue. I attached screenshots as much as possible and had to conceal parts of it as a matter of security.
(i) I included a recommendation letter from the CEO of company Y.
(ii) I included an external link to company Y’s newsletter publication where I was acknowledged for my exceptional contributions and impact on company Y’s continuous operations.

MC2: Part1 (i) I was invited to speak at a Nigeria internet regulation agency organised training in 2023 and the participants present were more than 500.
(i)I provided proof of the program flyer on the government agency official social media page.
(ii)I provided proof of my invite.
(iii)I provided proof of speaking by attaching a photo of me on stage and a photo of a subset of the crowd.I explained the purpose of my speech and it’s contribution
(iv)I attached screenshot of reviews by attendees and their comments on my speech and what they took away from the program
(v)Certificate of appreciation by the organisers.

MC2: Part 2 (ii) I’ve authored a book and the person that wrote the foreword of the book is very well renowned in my field.
(i)I showed metrics for my book, downloads metrics, reviews dropped by users and ratings.
(ii)I also provided links to my book on google books and amazon kindle.

MC3: I’ve been officially recognised by some tech giants for my security research and contributions to their security estate.
(i) Tech Giant1 - For a zero day vulnerability disclosed and helping fix it by providing remediation.
I provided redacted information on the vulnerability found, the timeline of report, confirmation of it being fixed, the official acknowledgment and recognition from TG1.
I included a pic of my award plaque from TG1, my name on TG1’s website with the link to page.
(ii) i was recognised by Tech Giant 2 - for a high severity vulnerability responsible disclosure. I provided redacted information on the vulnerability, how it threatened TG2 as a telecom giant and then I provided screenshots and a link to TG2 website where I was acknowledged.
(iii) I was officially recognised by Tech Giant 3 for a high severity vulnerability disclosure and helping remediate it. I explained how TG3 is a tech giant with millions of users, users that would have been affected and how I helped remediate it. I attached screen shot of acknowledgement from TG3 and a link to their website
OC2: Document 1
(i) I referred to the program I mentioned in MC where I was a speaker, but I also was a trainer during the program where I physically trained about 300+ groups of people.
I explained what I set out to achieve during the training, and the impact it had on the trainees.
I included screenshots from the training program, trainees holding their certificates, I attached screenshots of beautiful comments I received on the official social media page of the agencies.
(ii) I presented my contributions as a mentor and interview panelist for a cybersecurity organisation based in the UK with more than 1000 members. I provided screenshots of my conversation with the founder regarding activities, a link showing the curriculum of my mentorship program.
OC2: Document 2
(i) I built a gamified cybersecurity education platform to address the lack of early digital safety education for children in Africa. The initiative has reached 3,000+ children, with 300+ active platform users and 600+ trained in person across schools and communities. The project aligns with a national digital safety agency X and is supported by a Canadian teacher training organisation Y, enabling scalable delivery through educators.
Evidence: (i) Training session with kids, partner photos with Canadian founders, anonymised parent reviews, and website google analytics screenshots.
(ii) I run an independent scam-awareness and fraud-education channel on TikTok where I publish short, practical cybersecurity videos that break down real-world scams and teach non-technical audiences how to recognise and avoid digital fraud. My work gained national recognition when I was featured in Punch Newspaper, where I provided expert commentary on rising cybercrime and practical solutions for improving public digital safety.
Evidence:
(i) I added links to punch newspaper article,
(2) link to tiktok videos

OC3: Document 1 - Evidence of Technical Leadership & Product Architecture

I co-founded an AI product for secure public signage translation and led the technical architecture, designing a proprietary marker system with HMAC cryptographic validation to prevent spoofing and tampering. I included evidences like

(i) Incorporation document.
(ii)Photos of me and my co-founder.
(iii) My technical and entrepreneurial contributions to the platform.
(iv) Architectural diagrams showing my contributions.
Document 2 - Evidence of Commercial Business / Project Execution
I provided more information on the traction so far on the company
(i) Google search performance dashboard screenshot
(ii) Analytics of engagements, Total number of users, transactions carried out.
(iii) Docs of company incorporation and registration.
(iv)The company was selected as part of a UK sponsored incubator startup program. I provided email screenshots of this selection and my face alongside other founders.

I will appreciate feedbacks and comments on how to better improve or align my application. Thanks in anticipation.

Just to add this, I have an outstanding evidence, it’s a threat intelligence cyber security platform (web app) i built two years ago and currently in use for IOC’s analysis and investigations. I don’t know where to add it as its not a company per say so couldn’t use it in OC3

Hi @Abdulazeez_Abdulkadi

You’ve clearly put a lot of work into your evidence, and there are strong elements here. Below is some structured feedback to help you tighten the narrative and avoid common pitfalls.

The authors of your LOR seem appropriate, but still check that each one has a strong, verifiable career history in the digital technology sector.

You mentioned having 5+ years in IT as a backend engineer before transitioning into cybersecurity. Tech Nation counts total years in tech, not years in a specific sub discipline.

So you no longer fall under the less than 5 years guideline for Promise. This doesn’t disqualify you, but it means your narrative must be very clear about why you are applying as Promise despite your total years in tech.

MC

Screenshots, internal documents, and newsletters alone may not demonstrate external recognition. Ensure the CEO’s letter clearly articulates your impact, innovation, and leadership not just job duties.

Speaking can work if you demonstrate you were invited as an expert, the event was sector‑relevant, the audience was 100+, the topic was cybersecurity focused or sector focused. Then again, flyers, reviews, and certificates may weaken the narrative if they don’t show recognition. Your leading evidence should be the invitation letter, the organiser’s credibility, and the significance of the event, evidence of speaking and appreciation email from organisers, then reviews can just complement.

The MC3 can be okay, if you keep the focus on impact and recognition, not screenshots alone.
Ensure each disclosure clearly shows severity, your contribution, external recognition, and why
it matters to the sector

OC 2

Reusing the same evedence from MC weakens the uniqueness of OC2. Speaking + training in the same event may look like a one off, not sustained sector impact. Curriculum screenshots don’t show recognition. Instead, strengthen with Invitation letters, Evidence of structured mentorship, appreciation emails, media mentions, proof of ongoing involvement.

Gamified cybersecurity platform & TikTok channel. This can be strong if you show clear reach metrics, evidence of ownership, screenshots from analytics, testimonials or external validation. The Punch Newspaper article, is it a thought leadership piece, if yes, try and show its reach. It’s important that the narrative ties everything back to advancing cybersecurity education.

OC3

Incorporation documents and photos do not prove technical leadership. Architectural diagrams without a validated source are often dismissed. Technical contributions can be shown through
git commits, technical documentation with timestamps, product demos, evidence of your collaborations, external validation via accelerators, grants validating the value of the product, the incubator selection can show this if presented strategically. Above all clearly articulate your role and show technical ownership.

Threat intelligence cyber platform is actually valuable, if it has innovation element, can work in OC1, but because you have your 2 OCs, already you can use it in OC3 as a Techpreneur, If you can show you built it, it is used by others, It solves a real cybersecurity problem, you have analytics, user numbers and testimonials, It doesn’t need to be a registered company to qualify as contribution as an entrepreneur, if the product is product led, but you need to be strategic with your presentation though.

Overall, you have some good evidence but avoid repeating evidence across criteria, focus on recognition not participation, strengthen the credibility of each piece and ensure each document rightly align to the criteria.

All the best

1 Like

Thanks so much @Raphael I took in your feedback a made changes to my application before submitting. Fingers crossed

Great! And all the best with your application.