Your scanner found 4,812 things. Nine of them can actually hurt you.
Every exposure management tool on the market is good at finding. Almost none of them are good at telling you which finding is the one that ends your quarter. That gap is the whole product.
We correlate every vulnerability, misconfiguration, identity, and exposure into one graph, then walk it the way an attacker would — from what's reachable from the internet, through what it can authenticate to, to whatever it finally touches that you'd have to report.
What comes back isn't a longer list. It's a handful of paths, ranked by how far they get and what they reach, each one carrying the single fix that breaks it.
- Findings ingested4,812
- Exploitable paths9
- Fixes that break them3
Most of those 4,812 findings are real. They're just not reachable, not exploitable, or not attached to anything that matters. Working out which is which by hand is the job nobody has time for.
We've been on the receiving end of these reports.
Between us we've run remediation programmes where the tooling generated more work in a quarter than the team could clear in a year. Detection was never the problem.
Nothing in the stack could say: start here, and here's why.
CVE-2021-23017CVSS 9.4214 hostsCVE-2019-11043CVSS 9.86 hostsweak-cipher-suiteCVSS 5.31,902 hosts…and 4,809 moresorted by severitypublic-alb-01 to
customer-exports.Four stages, on a loop — not on a calendar.
Your environment changes daily. A quarterly assessment describes an environment that stopped existing in week two.
Pull from cloud, identity, endpoint, code, and the scanners you already run — then resolve it all into one graph instead of five inventories that disagree with each other.
Is there a working exploit, is the service actually exposed, and does anything block the hop? Findings that fail all three stop competing for your attention.
A critical CVE on a sandbox holding nothing is not a critical risk. The graph knows what sits behind each asset and weights it accordingly.
Ranked fixes with the path each one breaks — then re-verification, so "done" means the path is gone rather than a ticket being closed.
The questions that actually get asked.
- If this box gets popped, what can it reach from there?
- Which ten fixes this sprint move risk the most?
- What's internet-facing right now that nobody owns?
- Did last month's remediation close the path, or just the ticket?
- What do I put in front of the board that isn't a CVE count?
Designed to sit on top of what you already run.
It isn't another scanner competing with yours. It ingests what your existing tools already produce and does the correlation none of them do alone.
Correlation, not collection
Findings are linked across assets, identities, and network reachability, so what surfaces is an attack chain rather than another isolated alert.
Reasoning you can argue with
Every ranking comes with the path that produced it. If you disagree, you can see exactly where the model is wrong — and say so.
Continuous by construction
The graph updates as the environment does. No quarterly snapshot that's stale by the time it's been formatted.
Run it yourself, or have us run it.
Identical platform either way. The only question is whether you want the operating burden, and that's a staffing decision rather than a product one.
Your team owns the tenancy, the configuration, and the day-to-day. We onboard you and get out of the way.
- Your security team connects the sources and owns the tenancy.
- Full access to the graph, the scoring, and the reasoning behind it.
- Onboarding, integration support, and training included.
- You triage and route the prioritised paths yourself.
We operate the platform on your behalf, with a named person accountable for the outcome rather than for the uptime of a dashboard.
- We connect the sources and keep the integrations healthy.
- We triage what the graph surfaces and bring you the paths that matter.
- Monthly exposure review with a named analyst, not a generated PDF.
- Remediation tracked with your team until the path is verifiably closed.
Teams without a dedicated security function almost always start managed and move to self-service later. Both use the same platform, so that transition isn't a migration.
See the graph run against a real environment.
A walkthrough takes about forty minutes, and we'll use your context rather than a canned demo.