A scan is a snapshot.
Secorvia is live.
A point-in-time scanner tells you what was true when it last ran. Your cloud has already changed since then. Secorvia maps your environment as a live security graph, so what you're looking at is what's actually true right now, not what was true at last night's scan.
| Capability | Point-in-time scanners | Secorvia |
|---|---|---|
| Continuous scanning | Partial | Yes |
| Every cloud in one graph | No | Yes |
| Attack path & blast radius modeling | No | Yes |
| MITRE ATT&CK mapping | No | Yes |
| Compliance evidence automation | Partial | Yes |
| Time to first finding | Days | Minutes |
| Setup | Agent rollout | Read-only API, under 5 min |
Ranked by reachability, not just severity
A critical finding nobody can reach is noise. Secorvia ranks findings by exploitability and blast radius, not raw severity alone.
One graph, four clouds
AWS, Azure, GCP, and DigitalOcean mapped onto the same live security graph, so an attack path can cross providers and you'd still see it.
Read-only, five minutes
No agents, no sidecars. Connect a real cloud account with read-only API access and see actual attack paths the same day.
What a scanner is genuinely good at
Scanners are very good at the thing they were built for: enumerating known weaknesses against known signatures. Vulnerability databases are large, well maintained and updated constantly, and a scanner will find a vulnerable package version far more reliably than a person reading a manifest. Nothing below argues that you should stop collecting that data — Secorvia consumes the same feeds.
The limitation is what a scanner does with the result. It hands back a list sorted by severity, and severity is a property of the vulnerability, not of your environment. The scanner has no idea which subnet the host sits in, which role it can assume, or whether anything reachable from it holds customer data.
Where a snapshot falls short
Two problems compound. The first is time: a scan describes the moment it ran. In an estate where instances come and go within a day, a nightly result is a description of an environment that no longer exists in that form — and the resource created at 9am, misconfigured at 11am and exploited at 2pm never appeared in it at all.
The second is context. Ranking by CVSS alone puts a critical score on an isolated test box above a medium one on a bastion that can assume a production role. CVSS, EPSS and KEV answer three different questions, and none of them is "can an attacker actually get here from the internet, and what do they reach if they do?" That question needs a model of the environment, which a list does not have.
The practical result is a queue nobody trusts. When everything is critical, prioritisation moves from the tool to whoever shouts loudest, and genuinely urgent findings sit in the same undifferentiated pile as noise.
What a live graph changes
Secorvia keeps a continuously updated security graph of your assets, network reachability and identity relationships across AWS, Azure, GCP and DigitalOcean. Findings are attached to nodes on that graph rather than listed beside it, so the ranking can ask a different question: what is reachable, from where, and what falls with it.
Attack path analysis then traces the chains that actually exist in your environment — internet-facing workload, to the role it can assume, to the data store that role can read. A finding on that chain is work for this week. A finding on something nothing can reach is still recorded, still visible, and correctly ranked below it. Nothing is hidden; the order changes.
Because identity is where most cloud escalation actually happens, entitlement analysis sits on the same graph rather than in a separate product, so an over-permissioned role shows up as part of a path instead of as a separate report nobody correlates.
Common questions
Is Secorvia a vulnerability scanner?
It consumes the same vulnerability intelligence, but the output is different. A scanner returns findings sorted by severity; Secorvia correlates them against real network and identity reachability, so the ordering reflects exploitability and blast radius.
Does it need agents installed?
Cloud posture scanning is fully agentless — a read-only role is all it needs. Only the deeper workload features use a collector you install and control: one for Kubernetes posture and a host agent for runtime security. The agentless half runs perfectly well on its own.
How current is the graph?
It reflects the most recent completed scan of each connected account, and scan schedules are yours to configure. Scan coverage is shown alongside the findings, so a partial or failed collection is visible rather than being mistaken for a clean result.
What happens to low-reachability findings?
They are kept and remain searchable — reachability changes, and a finding that is harmless today can move onto a path tomorrow. They simply rank below the ones an attacker can use now.
Read further
What CSPM covers and where it stops explains the category, and blast radius covers the measure that drives the ranking. If your current baseline is a yearly engagement rather than a tool, see Secorvia vs. manual security audits. Plan limits are on the pricing page.
Comparing vendors rather than approaches? We set Secorvia against Wiz, Orca Security, Sysdig and Prisma Cloud, each with sources and a verification date, and put all of them in one comparison table.