Cryptographic risk assessment you can explain.
Qinsight’s approach to cryptographic risk assessment connects findings to source evidence, business context and known gaps. Understand what is exposed, why it matters and what to prioritize for remediation and post-quantum migration.
The model below illustrates how Atlas approaches prioritization. Figures are representative rather than drawn from a live environment.
What determines cryptographic risk?
An illustrative view of the evidence, business context and uncertainty that inform cryptographic risk assessment.
One finding, fully explained
Show the evidence before the score. Every factor is inspectable, and what is missing is stated rather than hidden.
Quantum-vulnerable key exchange
- Cryptographic condition
- RSA key exchange observed
- External exposure
- Internet-facing production endpoint
- Business criticality
- Tier 1 customer service
- Data longevity
- Classification incomplete
- Dependency impact
- 37 downstream consumers
A number you can watch move, against the coverage it is computed over
A posture score is only trustworthy if the coverage underneath it is rising too. Atlas plots both on the same axis, so a score that improves because discovery shrank is visible for what it is. Every point resolves to the evaluation that produced it.
Posture over time · range 90 days
Translate risk without changing the underlying evidence
A shared vocabulary helps cryptography, application, infrastructure and risk teams work from the same meaning.
What do I change?
The object, its dependencies, the change window and what will break downstream.
What is exposed?
Prioritized findings with the evidence behind each one and stated confidence.
How do you know?
Provenance, timestamps, collection method and full record history.
Are we improving?
Coverage, readiness trend and progress against published deadlines.
