Top region
67
United States potential exposure score
OBSERVA
Safe
Monitor/Authorized defensive workspace
Risk Intelligence
Regional exposure weighted by findings, account signals and control gaps.
Risk Intelligence cockpit
Prioritize regional defensive exposure across assets, accounts and governance gaps.
Regional exposure weighted by findings, account signals and control gaps. Scores combine severity, confidence, recency, affected assets, evidence quality and mitigation state so teams can triage defensive indicators without implying surveillance or attribution certainty.
Defensive intelligenceRequires verificationNo personal trackingAuthorized sources only
Formula: severity x category x confidence x recency decay x asset factor, then account, control-gap, vulnerability, evidence and mitigation modifiers. Regional signals require verification and use authorized sources only.
Critical
0
Regions requiring immediate defensive review
Assets
151
Company assets represented by mock signals
Confidence
73%
Source-weighted evidence confidence
Layers
Signal filters
Top Regional Exposure
Highest-priority regional signals
United States
Account signals, Known exploited vulnerabilities
67
82% confidence
Germany
Control gaps, Provider health
39
76% confidence
Singapore
Network exposure
23
74% confidence
Control Gap Impact
1
Unresolved governance signals
Account Signal Weight
1
Identity exposure indicators
Evidence Confidence
75%
Evidence quality average
Recommended Defensive Actions
5
Report-ready next steps
Recommended Defensive Actions
Verify account recovery paths and rotate credentials from trusted devices.
Prioritize verified KEV exposure remediation and patch validation.
Treat regional signal as potential exposure until verified by source evidence.
Close control evidence gaps and document compensating controls.
Review owned network exposure indicators through authorized provider checks.
Map view
6 regions match the active defensive-intelligence filters.
2D world map
Regional exposure layer
Simplified geography for company-asset risk posture. No individual location data is represented.
LowMediumHighCritical
Country boundaries use local world-atlas geometry; news nodes are source-reported context.
Signal Composition
Category and weighting mix
Defensive indicators are grouped by source category. Percentages describe the selected regional signal set, not live tracking.
Account50%
Vulnerabilities50%
Critical50%
High50%
Account Signal Weight
43
Control Gap Impact
0
Vulnerability Weight
41
Transparent model
Scoring formula
Regional scores combine severity, category weight, confidence, recency decay, affected assets, account, control-gap and known exploited vulnerability multipliers, evidence quality and mitigation status. The score is a defensive triage aid, not attribution certainty.
base = severityWeight * categoryWeight * confidenceFactor
recencyFactor = max(0.35, 1 - recencyDays / 90)
assetFactor = min(1.8, 1 + log10(affectedAssets + 1) / 4)
regionalScore = normalize(sum(base * recencyFactor * assetFactor * account/control-gap/KEV/evidence/mitigation multipliers))
recencyFactor = max(0.35, 1 - recencyDays / 90)
assetFactor = min(1.8, 1 + log10(affectedAssets + 1) / 4)
regionalScore = normalize(sum(base * recencyFactor * assetFactor * account/control-gap/KEV/evidence/mitigation multipliers))
Critical severity weight: 92
Account category weight: 1.28
Control gap category weight: 1.18
Unverified signals are evidence-weighted
Resolved mitigations reduce score impact
Regional signals require verification
View analyst details, timeline and fallback table
Regional Timeline
Signal recency and evidence state
Recency decay emphasizes recent defensive indicators while preserving unresolved historical exposure.
Privileged recovery path requires verification
United States - 2 days old - verified source evidence
Decay98%
Known exploited web component needs owner confirmation
United States - 8 days old - requires verification
Decay91%
Accessible fallback
Regional exposure table
| Region | Score | Level | Confidence | Assets | Top categories |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 67 | Medium | 82% | 60 | Account signals, Known exploited vulnerabilities | |
| 39 | Low | 76% | 36 | Control gaps, Provider health | |
| 23 | Low | 74% | 16 | Network exposure | |
| 8 | Low | 73% | 21 | Compliance readiness | |
| 5 | Low | 69% | 12 | Findings | |
| 1 | Low | 66% | 6 | Incident evidence |
Evidence stream
Regional signal feed
Privileged recovery path requires verification
United States · Identity provider signal
86% confidence2d old42 assetsverified
Known exploited web component needs owner confirmation
United States · CISA KEV adapter mock
78% confidence8d old18 assetsrequires verification
Service account review evidence gap
Germany · SOC 2 governance mock
81% confidence12d old27 assetsverified
Provider health degraded for defensive telemetry
Germany · Integration health mock
70% confidence18d old9 assetsverified
Owned edge service exposure requires review
Singapore · Network observation mock
74% confidence5d old16 assetsverified
Browser posture variance in regional fleet
Brazil · Browser posture mock
69% confidence22d old12 assetsrequires verification
Incident reporting training completion gap
India · NIS2 readiness mock
73% confidence31d old21 assetsverified