Native analysisScanner finding
Preserve the analysis source and affected location.
Enterprise Security Operating SystemSource. Build. Image.
Source. Build. Image.
Deploy. Runtime.
SecurityVault is the enterprise security operating system: one graph of findings, policy and evidence from code to cloud. Scan source and images, check build dependencies, enforce deployment policy and assess running applications and cloud posture, every stage on one security context from the first commit to the running workload.
Illustrative sample scenario · Harbour checkout
SECURITYVAULTA connected application estate
WORKFLOWRepositoryCode & dependencies
→Container registryBuild artifacts
→Cloud accountRunning workloads
→Identity providerAccess relationships
→APPLICATION
One application contextRelationships retain their sourceCONNECTED CONTEXT
- Source
- Repository & build
- Runtime
- Image & workload
- Access
- Identity & network
- Ownership
- Responsible team
SECURITYVAULTA finding with a reason to act
WORKFLOWIncoming signals
Dependency findingNeeds application context
Cloud configurationReview configuration evidence
Identity permissionInspect the access relationship
INVESTIGATION CONTEXTWhat is affected?
Who can act?
Who can act?
Review the finding alongside the application, its environment and the responsible team.
Finding + connected evidence ↗
A clearer basis for prioritisation
SECURITYVAULTContext follows the work
WORKFLOW01Investigate
FINDING CONTEXTUnderstand the issue
Security team
02Coordinate
ENGINEERING ACTIONAgree the next action
Responsible owner
03Verify
FOLLOW-UP REVIEWCheck the outcome
Review evidence
↳
The context stays attached.Finding · linked work · ownership · verification
↗SECURITYVAULTA release decision with a record
WORKFLOWRELEASE REVIEWCheck the candidate
against your policy.
against your policy.
✓Finding evidenceReview
✓Policy requirementsReview
✓Exception reasonsReview
§DECISION RECORDEvidence.
Reason.
Accountability.
Reason.
Accountability.
ReviewerSupporting evidenceRecorded outcome
Security decisions need
the whole picture.
A vulnerable dependency is one part of the story. The image carrying it, the workload running it and the team responsible determine the next questions to ask.
The shared ontology connects that context across SecurityVault’s capabilities. Security, engineering and audit teams work from the same relationships and evidence throughout the lifecycle.
Inside the consoleWhat the console
What the console
looks like.
Screenshots of the SecurityVault console from our own development tenant, captured on 1 November 2026 at 1280 px wide. Counts are live development data, not a customer environment. Journalists and analysts may reuse them with attribution.
Inside the security engine
Connected capabilities.
Shared context at every layer.
Each layer contributes to the same security engine and shared ontology. Explore the capabilities available today. Planned capabilities are listed separately.
Find risk where software begins.
Review source code, dependencies, secrets and infrastructure definitions before they become part of your running environment.
SASTStatic analysis with native per-language taint engines plus the open-source tools for each language, launched automatically.SCA & SBOMOpen-source dependencies, their known vulnerabilities and licences, and the bill of materials for what actually shipped.Secrets detectionCredentials in git history and image layers, found, routed to an owner and tracked to rotation.IaC securityTerraform, CloudFormation, Kubernetes and Helm checked before apply, paired with live cloud posture on the same graph.DASTDynamic testing of running applications, with findings on the same graph as the code behind them.API securityAPI inventory from specifications and source routes, with OWASP API Top 10 analysis and drift tracking.Threat modelingThreat models kept next to the system they describe and linked to the findings that test them.
Understand what you ship.
Connect the contents of a container image to its source and the workloads that run it.
See the environment around the application.
Bring cloud configurations, identity permissions and Kubernetes posture into the same security investigation.
Cloud posture (CSPM)AWS, Azure and GCP misconfiguration, drift and attack paths on the same graph as your code findings.Kubernetes security (KSPM)Cluster inventory and topology, CIS Kubernetes benchmarks and fail-closed admission control for unsigned images.Identity & entitlements (CIEM)Review human, workload and cloud identities, their permissions and the resources they can reach.Attack surface managementSubdomains and certificates discovered from your domains, with DNS and TLS posture checks and change alerts.
Turn context into accountable action.
Coordinate remediation, evaluate release policy and retain evidence for security and compliance reviews.
Vulnerability managementOne logical finding per issue, ranked by reachability and exposure, routed to the owning team, closed by evidence.Deployment gatesPolicy-as-code gates at pull request and pipeline time, evaluated by OPA over the graph, failing closed.Continuous complianceReview control status from scan evidence, cross-framework mappings and signed records available through an auditor portal.Remediation SLAsRemediation cases, tickets and fix pull requests, with SLA deadlines tracked per finding and owning team.
One shared investigationFrom discovery to
From discovery to
an accountable decision.
Explore the workflow, then see it in a live demonstration with our engineers.
Illustrative sample scenario · Harbour checkout
01 / 04 · Investigate
Code to runtime
Follow the finding.
Keep the context.
Investigate how source code becomes an artifact and where that artifact runs. Connections support the investigation; they do not replace review of the evidence.
Explore a fictional applicationCONNECTED INVESTIGATIONCommit Service
source.ref → build.ref
image.digest → workload.refReferences stay connected across the lifecycleCommitSource change
Repository reference stays with the build.
BuildArtifact identity
The digest anchors the image to its provenance.
ServiceRuntime relationship
Follow the workload into its environment.
Follow the chain from a source change to a running service.
Application security
Native analysis.
Tools you already know.
Native taint analysers cover 12 languages, alongside 45 scanner adapters. Analysis depth varies by language and tool; review the coverage that matters to your codebase.
Review SAST coverageCloud & runtime context
Understand the
running environment.
Review cloud posture, Kubernetes configurations and identity permissions alongside application findings. Runtime context here means workload and exposure relationships; planned detection capabilities are listed separately.
Explore cloud postureConnect your environment
Build on the tools
your teams use.
Explore 29 registered connectors and the supported scanner adapters. Check each integration’s purpose and scope before planning an evaluation.
Evaluate with confidence
Plan around
your requirements.
India is the initial hosting region. Expansion to the US and EU is planned around customer demand; those regions are not currently available.
Discuss residency, network and procurement requirements with our team before an evaluation. Detailed deployment requirements can be shared during your technical review.
Questions
Questions when evaluating ASPM.
- Do we need to replace our scanners?
- SecurityVault combines native analysis, scanner adapters and connected tools. Check the integration directory to establish which existing tools fit your evaluation.
- Can different teams use the platform?
- Yes. Explore workflows for security leaders, AppSec, developers, platform teams and auditors. Access remains governed by permissions.
- Are all capabilities shown on the website available?
- Our expanding offerings are listed on the roadmap. Contact our team to confirm rollout timing and the capabilities included in your evaluation.
- Can we see the product before connecting our environment?
- Yes. Start with the illustrative walkthrough or request a live demo. Any environment access for a later evaluation is agreed with your team.
- Where can we review security and architecture?
- Start with the trust centre and public architecture principles. Detailed implementation information is shared through the technical review process.
From the blog
Practical guides to ASPM
- ASPM vs CNAPP vs CSPM: what each covers and when to buyASPM vs CNAPP vs CSPM explained: where each category starts, what it covers and misses, where they overlap, and how to choose which you need first.
- Code-to-runtime security: a coverage checklistMap code-to-runtime security across source, builds, images, deployment and running workloads, with an evidence checklist for your evaluation.
- How to evaluate ASPM tools: a buyer's criteria checklistHow to evaluate ASPM tools on correlation, reachability, deduplication, gates, evidence and deployment model, with tests for your own proof of concept.
- Security finding correlation: one graph, not five queuesCorrelate security findings from SAST, SCA, container, IaC and cloud scanners on one graph, so each vulnerability becomes one ranked, routed finding.
Bring your questions.
See the platform in action.
Explore the workflows your organisation needs with a SecurityVault engineer. No repository access is required for an initial conversation.