Answer "how are we doing" without opening five products
PosturePortal is a read-only board. It aggregates findings, risk and coverage from every product that writes into the shared findings store — per tenant, and across a whole client book — so the state of an estate is one screen instead of five logins and a spreadsheet. It is the "so what?" layer: not another scanner, and it will never find anything the other products did not.
Under development Still being written
Real work is still happening on this one. It is not available, it carries no list price, and there is no date — a date invented to fill this space would be the first thing on this site you could catch us out on. Ask, and you will get an honest read on where it is.
Why it matters
Each product answers its own question well, and none of them answers the question that actually gets asked out loud. "How are we doing" is not a finding — it is an aggregate across five scanners, weighted by what matters to this estate, compared against last quarter. Today that means somebody opens each console in turn and rebuilds the same summary by hand, badly, once a month.
The person who has to answer it is usually the one with the least time to go and get it: an owner, a vCISO, an account manager the week before a client review. The data already exists — every product writes into the same store with severity, waivers and control tags on it. What is missing is the layer that reads it back and says what it adds up to. That is the entire product, and it is why this one is a board rather than a scanner.
What it does
- One board, every product — findings, risk scores and coverage from ShareCare, SecurityPortal, WebScan, MailTrust, CompliancePortal and Dredd, read out of the shared findings store rather than collected again. Nothing on the board is new information. What is new is that it is in one place.
- Per tenant and fleet-wide — the same board for a single estate and for a whole client book, so a provider can rank sixty tenants by exposure instead of opening sixty consoles and holding the comparison in their head.
- Top risks, not all risks — the findings that actually move the number, ordered, each naming the product it came from so the next click lands where the fix is. A board that lists everything has only moved the triage problem somewhere with a nicer font.
- Trends over time — whether posture is improving is a different question from what is broken today, and it is the one that gets asked in a board meeting. A point-in-time score cannot answer it; the products have been writing the history anyway.
- Connector health and coverage — which sources are feeding, which have gone quiet, and which parts of the estate nothing is watching. A board that cannot show its own blind spots is worse than no board: it puts a green square over a tenant nobody scanned.
- Saved views and annotations — the view a client sees every month, kept as a view; and somewhere to write down why a number is what it is. The annotation is usually the "so what", because the number rarely explains itself to the person being shown it.
- Read-only, with no connector of its own — it connects to nothing, holds no permission grant against your tenant, and has no write path to invoke. It reads what the other products already wrote, which is also why it costs almost nothing to run.
What it will not do
This is the least finished of the unreleased products — the banner above says where this one stands, and each of the others says the same on its own page rather than here, so none of them can drift out of step with the rest. There is no date on any of them, and there will not be one: ask, and you will get an honest read on where a product actually is instead of a month.
Its value is entirely borrowed. PosturePortal finds nothing itself, so on an estate running one product it is that product's own screen with an extra click in front of it. It starts being worth having at three or four products, and it earns its place across a fleet. A single pane over a single data source is a second copy of a screen you already have, and we would rather say that than let you discover it after switching it on.
ConditionalAccessPortal's findings do not reach these rollups. They stay inside that product today, so Conditional Access coverage will not appear on the board until that changes — a gap worth knowing about before you assume the board is complete.
It will never remediate. Fixing stays in the product that found the problem, where the approval trail and the write path already live, and no amount of aggregation will put a "fix this" button on this board. It also carries no price: it connects to nothing and will not be sold as a separate line, but "not a separate line" is not a number, and inventing one against something still being built is how a price list stops being worth reading.
Capability and what you get from it
| Capability | What you get from it |
|---|---|
| Cross-product findings aggregation | The estate on one screen, read from findings the products already wrote |
| Per-tenant and fleet-wide views | Rank a client book by exposure without opening every console |
| Top risks, ordered and attributed | What to do next, and which product to open to do it |
| Trends over time | Whether last quarter's work moved anything, answered with history rather than opinion |
| Connector health and coverage | The board shows what it cannot see, so green never quietly means unscanned |
| Saved views and annotations | The same view every month, with the reason a number is what it is written beside it |
| No connector, no write path | Nothing to set up, and nothing on the board that can change your tenant |
Start with what feeds it
The board is only ever as good as what is underneath it, so the useful first move is not waiting for this one — it is getting real findings into the store from a product that runs today. Tell us what you need to be able to answer, and we will tell you honestly how far off this is.