A finding nobody sees
is not a finding.
Ratings only matter if they reach the person who can act. GuardianGaze pushes findings into the tools your teams already work in, with the evidence, remediation and SLA travelling with them.
Outbound by default. Only cloud posture uses scoped read-only access.
Into the tools you already run
No new console for someone to remember to check.
Slack
Findings routed to the channel that owns them, at the severity threshold you set, so a critical does not wait for someone to open a dashboard.
Jira
Findings become tickets with the evidence, remediation and SLA carried across, and stay linked so closing the ticket closes the loop.
Sentinel · Splunk · QRadar
External findings alongside your internal telemetry, so an exposed service and the traffic hitting it can be correlated in one place.
AWS · GCP · Cloudflare
Optional read-only scoped access for cloud posture and misconfiguration assessment. Everything else is observed without any access at all.
Findings governance
- Triage findings and assign an owner
- Mark false positives so they stop recurring
- Record accepted risk with a rationale
- SLA tracking from raised to resolved
- On-demand rescan to confirm a fix cleared
Platform and access
- Multi-tenant, with multi-domain portfolios
- JWT authentication with OTP two-factor
- Full activity audit trail across the tenant
- Continuous monitoring plus on-demand rescans
- Self-serve entry, rate your own company first
Jira, email and Wazuh connected and healthy, with SIEM, ticketing and notification integrations ready to add
Common questions
Do integrations require access to our environment?
Only the cloud ones, and only if you choose to connect them, those use read-only scoped access to assess posture. Slack, Jira and SIEM integrations are outbound: we send findings to you.
What happens to a finding once it is in Jira?
It stays linked. Findings governance covers triage, false-positive marking and accepted-risk decisions, and those states are reflected rather than the finding silently reappearing on the next scan.
Is there an audit trail?
Yes. The platform is multi-tenant with JWT authentication and OTP two-factor, and keeps a full activity audit trail of who did what, including triage decisions and integration configuration changes.
Findings belong where the work already happens
Every security tool wants to be the place you start your day, and almost none of them are. The dashboard that requires a separate login gets checked enthusiastically for a fortnight and then during incidents only, which is the worst possible cadence for something whose value is early warning.
So the useful design goal is the opposite of engagement: get findings out of the platform and into whatever your team already has open. A ticket in the system where work is tracked, a message in the channel the team already watches, an event in the tool that already holds your operational history.
The measure of a good integration is that people stop visiting the dashboard except to investigate. That is success rather than disuse.
Severity is the routing key, not source
The failure mode is routing everything to one destination. Send every observation to the channel that interrupts people and the channel gets muted within a fortnight, including for the finding that mattered. Alert fatigue is an engineering outcome, not a personality flaw.
The configuration that survives contact with a busy team routes by severity. Critical findings interrupt. Material changes create a ticket with an owner. Routine observations go somewhere reviewable, or nowhere at all, a report read weekly is a perfectly respectable destination for most of what a platform observes.
For portfolios of any size, digests replace per-event streams entirely. A per-finding feed across forty rated companies is unreadable by construction, and unreadable feeds get filtered rather than fixed.
An alert without a named owner is an observation
The single largest determinant of whether findings get fixed is not severity, tooling or reporting quality. It is whether a specific person is accountable for a specific finding.
Integration into a ticketing system is what makes that concrete: a finding becomes an item with an assignee, a due date and a visible state, inside the process the team already uses for everything else. Findings that live only in a security dashboard belong to the security team by default, which is usually the team least able to fix them.
This is also what makes contractual and internal standards enforceable. A requirement nobody measures is paperwork; a requirement that generates an owned ticket when it is breached is a control.
Put findings where your team already works
Start with a rating on your own domain, then wire the findings into Slack or Jira once you can see what arrives.
Free for your own organisation.