Solutions
Know which applications are actually resilient — and which ones only say they are.
Architecture risk intelligence assembles the evidence scattered across your estate into a single, defensible view of where resilience risk really sits, updated continuously rather than once a year.
The assessment is annual. The environment is not.
Most large enterprises govern application resilience through periodic assessment: a questionnaire goes out, owners fill it in, findings are logged, and the record ages quietly for twelve months. Meanwhile components are added, hosting migrates, certificates lapse and operating systems fall out of support. By the time the next cycle comes around, the record describes an environment that no longer exists.
The deeper problem is that the record was never evidence in the first place. It was attestation — a set of declarations collected under time pressure from people with every incentive to answer optimistically. Nothing in the process compared those declarations against what the infrastructure was actually reporting.
The information needed to check them almost always exists. It is simply spread across a configuration management database, a data warehouse, a resilience platform, a document repository and a folder of vendor audit reports, with no shared key and no reason to ever have been joined.
What we build
One record of risk, assembled from everything you already hold
We build the joining layer first, then the intelligence on top of it.
Estate reconciliation
Hosts, databases, certificates, endpoints and cloud instances pulled from every inventory that holds them, deduplicated to a unified model and tagged with which source saw them. Where two systems disagree, the conflict is flagged rather than silently resolved in favour of whichever loaded last.
Requirement modelling
Your non-functional requirements structured properly — a root requirement, its applicability rules, its parameters and any overlays — so that a catalogue of hundreds of controls becomes something you can reason about, filter and version instead of a flat spreadsheet.
Multi-layer analysis
Each applicable control is evaluated against observed infrastructure, declared attestations, design documentation and vendor evidence at once. The model returns a verdict, the basis for it, its reasoning and citations pointing back to the specific facts it used.
Deterministic risk scoring
Impact and exposure are computed in code from the verdict, the control criticality and the confidence of the evidence. Risk rolls up to the application and the portfolio the same way every time, and any number on the screen can be traced to its inputs.
Change-triggered re-evaluation
A new component, a hosting migration or a fresh scan result triggers a scoped re-assessment of only the controls it touches — so the record tracks the environment rather than the calendar.
Expert intervention
Architects can attach evidence, correct a verdict or add context, and every intervention is attributed, dated and revocable. Retractions append to the history rather than erasing it, which is what makes the record survivable in an audit.
What changes
What this changes
Findings you can defend
Every verdict cites the document, scan result or inventory record it rests on. When an application owner disputes a finding, the conversation is about the evidence rather than about the tool.
Honest coverage
You learn how much of your control coverage is genuinely evidenced versus merely asserted. In practice this number surprises people — and it is the single most useful thing the system produces in its first month.
Real violations surface early
Cross-referencing currency data against resilience claims routinely uncovers infrastructure running years past end-of-support underneath applications recorded as compliant. These are the findings that were always there and never visible.
Two audiences, one dataset
Leadership gets posture, trend and the handful of drivers actually moving the number. The engineering team gets the full control list, the evidence trail and the interventions. Neither view is a separate spreadsheet that drifts from the other.
How this usually starts
Rarely with a platform. It starts with one portfolio, one set of controls, and a question about whether the current record is true. That is enough to build the joining layer, and the joining layer is the part that turns out to be reusable.
Start with the applications you are least sure about.
Pick the ten that keep you awake. If the evidence agrees with the record, you have lost a fortnight. If it does not, you have found the programme.