It starts with what's at stake, reads every source you have against it, weighs how far each one can be believed, and only counts what it can trace back to the page.
Request remediation plan from Larchmere HR for employee sanction language, back…
Request remediation plan from Larchmere HR for password policy parameters, admi…
Request remediation plan from Larchmere HR for media handling, virtual instance…
| Risk category | Assurance confidence | Trust | Needs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control Effectiveness | 95 | Remediate — 3 open items → | |
| Operational Resilience | 88 | Strengthen — 2 open items → | |
| Governance & Vendor Management | 95 | ||
| Other | 95 | Remediate — 2 open items → |
A gap in a payroll vendor holding employee bank data is not the same as a gap in your print shop. Every recommendation starts from how much is at stake, and the list is ranked by what is left once the evidence is weighed.
No single document tells you how exposed you are. A contract says what was promised, an audit says what was tested, a survey says what the vendor claims, and a rating says what the outside world can see. CyberContext reads them together, against the risks you care about, and notices when they disagree.
What they signedContracts and agreementsTerms, obligations, notice periods, audit rights
What they show and sayVendor evidenceAudit reports, trust centers, policies, completed surveys
What others seeIndependent viewsSecurity ratings, news and events
What you knowYour own contextYour assessments, procurement data, how you use themMost risk registers treat a self-reported "yes" the same as an audited one. CyberContext weighs every piece of evidence by who produced it, and tells you which work each vendor needs.
| Vendor | Inherent | Assurance | Best evidence | Trust | Needs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vessimor Payroll | High | 92 | Self-Attest | 28 | Verifystrong on paper, unproven |
| Wickerby Docs | High | 58 | Audit (SOC 2) | 88 | Remediateurgent actions open |
| Ferrostead Data Centers | Medium | 88 | Audit (SOC 2) | 86 | |
| Glenvarra Networks | Medium | 66 | Self-Attest | 35 | Verifyrests on thin evidence |
| Quarrybrook Cloud | Medium | 31 | Self-Attest | 42 | Remediatecontrols below the bar |
"Upon confirmation of a security incident affecting customer data, the Company notifies affected customers within seventy-two (72) hours via the designated security contact."
Each requirement is checked against the document it rests on. Click any result and you're looking at the passage, the page and the report it came from. Results that can't be traced back get no credit, so a made-up answer shows up as a gap, not a pass.
| Your requirement | Who covers it | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Encryption of data at rest | Vendor | Tested in their audit report |
| User access reviews for your accounts | You | Handed to you by their report. Not on your control list: request an access review with sign-off |
| Passwords for application sign-in | You | Handed to you by their report. Covered, per your scoping profile |
| Monitoring of admin actions in your tenant | Nobody | Gap: not in their report, not on your control list |
Much of what you'd send a questionnaire for is already out there. CyberContext collects it and counts each piece for what it is worth.
Audit reports often hand some controls back to you. CyberContext shows, for each of your requirements, whether the vendor covers it, you do, or no one does, and for the ones handed to you, what evidence to request. How you use the vendor's product decides which requirements apply in the first place.
These are the numbers that tell you a program is working, not just busy.
From new evidence arriving or a vendor's risk changing, to the right person acting on it.
For every vendor in the portfolio: how much risk is left, and how far you can rely on what that rests on.
By vendor and across the portfolio. Without a risk model, every gap looks equally important.
The time that goes into each vendor, and the work CyberContext takes off the list.
Every finding points to the passage it came from, and closes as resolved, risk accepted or no longer applies.
Example data · names are fictional
Bring a few you're unsure about: a vendor's audit report, a customer contract, an application's policies or a new rule. We'll show you what needs fixing, what needs proof, and what you can stop worrying about.
We'll use your details only to arrange the walkthrough. See our privacy policy.
