SecurityVault
Request a demo
For GRC, compliance and audit

Keep evidence ready.
Make reviews easier.

Connect controls to the findings and scan evidence behind them. Track changes and give auditors a traceable record to review.

Request a demo Continuous compliance
The control evidence reviewmatrix
Requirement to review record
Control objective
Evidence source
Review history
Investigation context
01 / Select control

Start with the requirement being assessed.

  • Framework mapping
  • Control scope

Read the mapped control and the scope of the available evidence.

Audit season, every season

Why does audit preparation still feel manual?

01

Point-in-time proof

Controls are evidenced once a year with exports and screenshots, then drift unobserved until the next audit.

02

The same control, again

One control is evidenced separately for each framework because the tools do not know the requirements overlap.

03

Exceptions that never expire

Risk is accepted in a chat thread, with no owner, no expiry and nothing to show the auditor when they ask.

Continuous, not annual

How does SecurityVault change a compliance team's week?

Control status
Findings violate controls and typed evidence satisfies them, from the repository, the image and the cloud. Status is re-evaluated as scans complete. See continuous compliance.
Cross-walks
Evidence collected once is applied to every equivalent control across mapped frameworks, so one test supports several obligations. See the framework list.
Exceptions
Risk acceptances carry an owner, an expiry and an approver chain with optional dual control. An expired exception stops satisfying the policy. See deployment gates.
Audit fieldwork
Invite auditors to a read-only portal with signed evidence. Questionnaire responses such as CAIQ, SIG and HECVAT are generated from the same evidence.
Deadlines
Every finding has a policy deadline and breaches are timestamped, which is the evidence a remediation control asks for. See remediation and SLAs.
Your view in SecurityVault

What does the GRC / Auditor Home show?

Its question is the auditor's own: which controls have defensible, fresh evidence, and which conclusions are unverifiable? Posture in scope covers identity, data and governance.

Control evidence health

Control posture by framework, beside evidence freshness, so stale evidence is visible before an auditor finds it.

Evidence sources

A summary of the compliance regimes in scope and the sources that feed them.

Decisions for review

Recent policy decisions and the ranked stories that need a governance view, in one place.

Evidence an auditor can verify

How does connected evidence support an audit?

Evidence from the source

Control status reads the same findings engineers fix, so compliance and security cannot drift into two versions of the truth.

Signed and chained

Control decisions are digitally signed over a canonical payload and the audit log is hash-chained, so tampering is detectable.

Fail closed

A gate that cannot evaluate denies, and a CIS Kubernetes control that could not be assessed is reported as not measured, never as a pass.

Human accountability

Every disposition is attributed to a named person with a reason code, which is exactly what an auditor samples.

One control first

How do GRC teams get started?

01

Choose the hardest control

Request a demo with one framework and the control your auditors always question.

02

Connect evidence sources

Engineering connects a repository and a cloud account; the evidence starts flowing to mapped controls.

03

First control report

Review the control from framework requirement to the scans that decide it, then invite your auditor to the portal.

FAQ

Preparing for the next audit

Which control mappings can our audit team review?
6 frameworks ship with a seeded control catalogue: SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI DSS v4, HIPAA, GDPR and CIS Controls v8. Others are cross-walk targets or custom frameworks using the same control model. See the framework list.
How does one piece of evidence satisfy several frameworks?
The platform includes 37 mapping links across 7 framework pairs. These help identify evidence that may be reusable. Reviewers still assess its scope, freshness and sufficiency for each requirement; a mapping does not make different obligations identical.
What does an external auditor receive?
An invitation to a read-only portal with its own credentials, scoped to the controls in the engagement, evidence records with hashes and the public key to verify signed control decisions. Auditors never get console access.
Can we keep our existing GRC platform?
Yes. SecurityVault is the evidence and control-evaluation layer. Export to your GRC system through the API or the SIEM connectors.
Can automation change a control result or a finding's disposition?
Control evaluations can update as evidence changes. A finding's disposition, such as false positive or accepted risk, requires an authorised person and a reason code. These are different actions: automated evaluation does not replace human risk acceptance.

SecurityVault for other roles: CISOs · Security engineers · AppSec · Platform engineers · Developers · SOC and IR. See every role.

Further reading: continuous compliance evidence, framework cross-walks on one evidence chain and automating SOC 2 evidence collection.

See it on your controls

Bring the control your auditors question most.

We walk from a framework requirement to the findings and scans that decide it, then show what your auditor would see.

Request a demo See the framework list