786 Cyber is built on a vision to reduce replication, automate outcomes, and improve your cybersecurity.
Why
Today’s security tools are typically singularly focused, either by design or by implementation — one for your people, a different one for your policies, another for your technology and threats. Even good tools rarely talk to each other, and none of them talk to whichever compliance framework your regulator or your biggest customer actually requires. So you end up doing the real work once, then proving it five separate times, in five separate formats, for five separate auditors, because every framework and every tool treats itself as an island.
After 25 years watching that pattern repeat across the security industry, our goal at 786 Cyber was to create a platform that empowers you to manage security as three things working together, not a checklist assembled from disconnected parts: who has access to what (people & identity), what your organisation has committed to doing and can prove it did (policy & process), and what you actually run and what’s actually threatening it (technology & threats). Treat those as three disconnected products, or as one checklist that ignores the difference between them, and you get exactly the manufactured complexity and dependency-by-design 786 Cyber was built to move away from.
What
786 Cyber is organised around those three pillars — not as marketing categories, but as the platform’s actual structure. Each one answers a different foundational question, and each has a plain-English analogy worth keeping in mind, because the idea behind each pillar is older and simpler than the technology that implements it.
Technology & Threats — cyber hygiene. Most illness isn’t caused by exotic pathogens; it’s caused by skipping the basics — hand-washing, not sharing needles, keeping wounds clean. Most breaches are the same: an unpatched system, an exposed cloud bucket, a forgotten subdomain, a vulnerability that’s been sitting there for months. This pillar is the hygiene layer: a live asset inventory across hardware, endpoints, cloud, and domains; vulnerability prioritisation that ranks findings by real-world exploitability (via EPSS — Exploit Prediction Scoring System — and CISA KEV, the US government’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalogue) rather than severity score alone; CSPM (Cloud Security Posture Management) misconfiguration scanning across AWS, Azure and GCP; OWASP ZAP-driven web application scanning; a four-way network and asset relationship graph; external attack-surface and dark-web monitoring built on OSINT (open-source intelligence) feeds — Shodan, DNSTwist, VirusTotal, crt.sh; a per-app SBOM (Software Bill of Materials, in CycloneDX format) so you know exactly which CVE affects which asset; and branded, exportable scan reports. Basic hygiene, done continuously, catches most of what actually gets organisations breached.
Environment & People — understanding your environment. A building manager who doesn’t have an accurate tenant list, doesn’t know who holds which keys, and doesn’t notice when someone who left still has building access isn’t managing security — they’re managing a guess. This pillar is the census: a live people directory synced from Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace, tri-state MFA tracking (enabled, disabled, or honestly unknown — never quietly assumed), an identity relationship graph, and breach-exposure monitoring tied to your actual domains. You cannot secure an environment you cannot see, and most organisations can’t currently answer “who has access to what” without a spreadsheet that’s already out of date.
Policy & Process — grounded by principles. A building built to an open, published structural code can be verified by any qualified inspector and still makes sense if the original architect leaves. A building built to one contractor’s private, undocumented method can’t — you’re dependent on them forever. This pillar is the compliance wizard, the Evidence Vault (a single library of evidence reused across every assessment that needs it, not re-uploaded per framework), Capability Gap Analysis, and the policy vault and generator — all grounded in open, recognised standards rather than 786 Cyber’s own proprietary logic. If you left tomorrow, your evidence and your mapped controls would still make sense to whoever came next, because they’re mapped to public frameworks, not to us.
What ties the three pillars together is one framework-neutral canonical control model — currently a 27-category vocabulary — mapping to 31 compliance frameworks plus a threat & attack layer (MITRE ATT&CK, and the Unified Kill Chain, a public attacker-behaviour model built on top of it). Today that’s 1,999 controls, 1,936 control-level cross-mappings (181 of them backed by a published, official crosswalk — CIS Controls v8.1 to the CJIS Security Policy — not just AI-inferred similarity), and 1,467 ATT&CK coverage links tying controls to real attacker techniques. That ATT&CK figure is lower than a number we published earlier this year — on purpose. The old count double-counted coverage through policy and governance controls that don’t actually defend against a technique; removing that made the number smaller and more honest, which is the trade we’ll always make.
Explore the interactive Security Universe → — the live map of exactly this: the three pillars, connected to controls, connected to frameworks. Filter by region, drill into a single framework, or watch two frameworks light up their shared controls side by side.
How
The mechanism is Capability Gap Analysis, and it’s worth being precise about what it does and doesn’t do, because the precision is the whole point.
Every framework’s controls map down to the same 27-category canonical vocabulary, and every canonical category maps to an underlying capability — MFA enforcement, cloud posture scanning, web application scanning, asset inventory, and so on. Each capability is marked Evidenced (detected natively from platform activity, or from a connected third-party tool), Unknown (honestly flagged as not yet evidenced, never assumed either way), or Declared (documentation- or process-based, self-attested). Evidence one capability once, and every framework that depends on it inherits the answer — that’s real, it’s live today, and it’s what actually replaces the five-times-over duplication described above. Gaps route automatically to the right fix too: an in-platform module you can switch on, a documentation task, or a third-party partner recommendation — three distinct outcomes instead of one generic “not met.”
What this deliberately does not do is auto-credit one answer as satisfying every framework it might apply to. We looked hard at building that — “answer once, it counts everywhere” is the obvious next step, and it’s the single biggest reason a multi-framework customer would choose one platform over running frameworks separately. But the honest substrate for that claim is a published, official crosswalk between two specific frameworks (like the CIS-to-CJIS mapping above) — not the broader canonical model, which tells you what a control is about, not that two controls are provably the same. Auto-crediting off the broader model would flag dozens of loosely-related controls per answer, which a person would just “accept all” without reading — automation wearing the costume of review. So the in-platform Compliance Universe — your organisation’s own personalised version of this galaxy, showing your real coverage and your real ATT&CK exposure — is being refined to do this properly: surface potential cross-framework matches as suggestions a human reviews and accepts, never as an automatic credit. Slower to ship, and worth it — an unearned claim is exactly the kind of overpromise this platform exists to be the alternative to.
The takeaway
Security isn’t one checklist wearing different labels for different regulators. It’s three things — who has access, what you’ve committed to and can prove, and what you actually run and what’s threatening it — done properly once, and mapped honestly to every framework that needs to see it. The Security Universe is where you can see that structure for yourself, pillar by pillar, control by control, framework by framework.
See your three pillars connect
Explore the Security Universe, or start free and map your own people, policies, and technology across every framework that applies to you.
Explore the Security Universe → · Start free — no card required →