Model how a real attack moves through your organisation, what it reaches, which control stops it, and which change to your defences actually alters the outcome.
Plenty of findings, ranked by a severity score that cannot see which of your systems matters.
Real proof, across an agreed scope, at one moment. Everything outside that boundary is untested.
Sound guidance, and all of it competing for the same budget with no way to rank it.
BreachForge connects those findings to your estate, your controls and the systems you cannot afford to lose, then shows which change closes the most paths to the things that matter.
Your components, your crown jewels, your controls at a maturity level rather than a tick. No agents, no access, nothing installed.
Twenty two attack paths move through the model and stop at the first control that holds them.
Which paths get to your crown jewels, where each one was stopped, and which control did the stopping.
Raise a control and run it again. Watch the paths that ran through it stop.
Help desk social engineering, OAuth consent phishing, ransomware that destroys the backups, supply chain, and eighteen more. Each stops where a control holds.
Identity, endpoint, network, cloud, application, data, infrastructure, security operations, resilience, third party and the human layer.
No agents, no scanning, no credentials handed over, nothing to install and no disruption to anything in production.
Three control improvements, modelled against the same estate, ranked by what each one actually shuts.
Then you decide, knowing what each one buys. That is a security decision rather than another finding.
A model reasons from what it is told. That is its whole strength and its whole limit, and anyone who describes only the first half is selling you something.
Each path stops at the first control that holds it, so you see how far it got, what stopped it, and which crown jewels were reachable.
Nothing is attacked, so nothing is proven. Where a customer, an insurer or a certification scheme wants evidence a specific weakness can be used, that is a penetration test, and we will say so.
Raise conditional access from declared to enforced and re-run. That is the question a report cannot answer, because the report was written before you made the change.
The engine holds maturity, not money. It will tell you which change closes more paths. It will not tell you which is better value, because it does not know what either costs you.
Upload a configuration export and it is read in your browser and compared with what you recorded. Mark MFA as enforced, and if the export measures it lower, you are told. Nothing is silently corrected.
A server nobody listed is not in the model, and neither is the application a department bought on a card. It is honest about what it holds and silent about what it does not.
Most organisations find a whole pillar empty and had not noticed. No mail authentication, no help desk verification, nothing against recovery testing. An empty pillar is a finding on its own.
This is exposure, not detection. It does not watch traffic, read logs or raise alerts, and it will never tell you an intrusion is under way. If that is what you need, you need a SOC and this is not one.
The only thing this product can tell you that you did not already believe about yourself is where you are wrong. That is why the evidence check reports disagreements rather than quietly fixing them.
A report captures what was true during an engagement. A cloud application arrives in March, a supplier connects in April, an identity policy changes in June, and in September somebody opens the January document.
Change the control, run the paths again, see what stopped and what still reaches what matters. The picture moves when the estate moves.
A structured way for leadership to see exposure and decide where the security budget goes, in language a board follows without a translator.
Several named environments on one account. Model each client, switch between them, and every view follows. Discovery compressed from weeks to an afternoon, and evidence behind every recommendation you make.
Order the backlog by what each finding reaches rather than by severity alone, and show the work that closes the most paths first.
Know what can reach what matters.
Know what to do next.