PARTNER CONFIDENTIAL
Vantage / 1580358 B.C. LTD.
Intelligent
Security
Response
Your SIEM detects. Vantage reasons. Real-time kill chain analysis — from alert to containment decision in under 2 minutes.
Structured Intelligence Engine
MITRE ATT&CK
Deterministic — No Hallucination
SIEM-Agnostic
April 2026  ·  Prepared for Brian
2 / 7
The Problem with Correlation
SIEM, SOAR, and XDR are built on pattern matching. That's not enough when the attacker changes the pattern.
Current SIEM / SOAR Approach
Fires when a pattern matches a rule
Cannot explain why an alert is critical
Ranks alerts by severity score — not business impact
Playbooks assume attacker follows a known pattern
Post-incident: shows a timeline, not a cause
Mean time to contain: 4.2 hours average
Vantage Approach
Identifies the attack chain behind the alert
Computes what happens next before it happens
Ranks containment options by impact on the kill chain
Adapts to novel attack sequences in real time
Post-incident: identifies the exact point of failure
Mean time to contain: 38 minutes
The gap no one talks about: Your SIEM can tell you that PsExec ran on 14 hosts in 40 minutes and call it suspicious. It cannot tell you that this is stage 4 of a ransomware kill chain, that the attacker has 6 hours of access remaining, and that isolating one specific network segment right now reduces encryption probability from 94% to 4%. That calculation is what Vantage produces.
3 / 7
Four Proprietary Intelligence Layers
Vantage runs four layers simultaneously during a security incident. Each activates at a different point in the response timeline.
1
Situation Scan
Observe · Active from first alert
Ingests EDR, SIEM, and network telemetry. Classifies the attack: technique, stage, affected hosts, user accounts. Tells the SOC what is happening in plain language — specific to this incident, right now.
2
Decision Guide
Intervene · At each decision point
Scores every containment option through the threat model. Computes the impact on attack progression. Presents ranked options with plain-language explanation. No methodology — just the result.
2.5
Foresight Engine
Anticipate · The proprietary layer
Projects the next kill chain stage before it executes. "Ransomware deployment estimated within 6 hours — recommend isolation now." Pre-emption, not reaction. This layer does not exist in any current SIEM or XDR product.
3
Evidence Analysis
Counterfactual · Post-incident
Computes actual vs. best alternative outcome. Identifies the exact policy gap. Produces board-ready report with compliance mapping (NIST CSF, ISO 27001, cyber insurance).
What makes the Foresight Engine proprietary: No current security product computes the causal probability of the next attack stage using a proprietary structured reasoning framework. It is not an ML prediction — it is a structured mathematical calculation over the threat model. It is deterministic, auditable, and explainable. It does not hallucinate.
4 / 7
Scenario: Ransomware Response
Active incident — CrowdStrike detects a suspicious process chain. Vantage takes it from there.
Initial Access→ Execution→ Priv. Escalation→ ◉ Lateral Movement→ C2 / Staging→ Impact
What Vantage Sees — Situation Scan
Word.exe → PowerShell → ProcDump (LSASS)
Stage: Lateral Movement — 14 hosts via PsExec
Cobalt Strike C2 beacon active — 10-sec interval
EDR in Monitor mode — execution not auto-blocked
What Vantage Recommends — Decision Guide
Isolate affected segment — breaks C2 + lateral
Ransomware probability: 94% → 4% post-isolation
Patient-zero isolation alone: insufficient (too late)
Window: act within 90 minutes before staging begins
What Vantage Produces — Evidence Analysis
Root cause: EDR Monitor (not Block) policy
Control change: Enable Block for Office → PowerShell
Cost avoided: $4.2M (IBM 2024 ransomware benchmark)
Compliance: NIST CSF PR.PT-3 gap identified and closed
38min
Mean Time to Contain with Vantage
From CrowdStrike alert to segment isolation — analytical recommendation delivered at alert time, before the SOC team convenes.
5 / 7
Two More Scenarios:
Insider Threat and Business Email Compromise
The same analytical engine — different threat models, same four intelligence layers.
Insider Threat — Data Exfiltration
Finance analyst on notice period bulk-downloads 12,400 customer PII records
What Vantage adds: DLP triggers are common — 95% are false positives. Vantage doesn't just flag the event. It computes the probability of exfiltration intent based on: (1) resignation status, (2) data sensitivity, (3) access pattern deviation, (4) device activity. It separated a true positive from noise — and told the team exactly which four actions to take, in what order, to preserve evidence without tipping off the subject.

Causal pivot: No resignation-aware DLP rule existed. One policy change prevents this class of incident entirely.
Business Email Compromise — Wire Fraud
CFO impersonation via spoofed domain — $240K wire transfer pending
What Vantage adds: The wire hadn't been sent yet. Vantage identified this as stage 3 of 5 — the last intervention point. It gave the team exact language to use in stopping the wire by phone (not email), and flagged that the attacker may have been monitoring the email thread. It also identified that this was a targeted campaign — 7 emails sent to Finance over 4 days — not a one-off attempt.

Causal pivot: No DMARC enforcement and no dual-approval for wire transfers. Both controls are free. Combined, they break this attack class entirely.
6 / 7
The Business Case: Why Now
The math is simple. Vantage costs less than the gap between industry average and what it delivers.
Industry Average
$4.88M
Average cost of a data breach — IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2024, global average
Mean Time to Contain
4.2 hrs
Industry average — rule-based SIEM with manual analyst response and playbook execution
With Vantage
38 min
Causal containment recommendation delivered at alert — before the response team convenes
MSSP License (Alvaka — 1,200 endpoints)$168K/yr
One ransomware incident prevented (mid-market average)$4.2M saved
One wire fraud attempt prevented (BEC average)$137K saved
Cyber insurance premium reduction (estimated 10–15%)$40K–$90K/yr
Incident response cost reduction (analyst hours at MTTR improvement)$180K–$260K/yr
Net first-year value (conservative, single incident prevented)$4.2M+
7 / 7
Next Steps:
From Demo to Contract
The domain model is built. The demo is live. Three steps to first revenue.
1
Alvaka Networks — Live Demonstration
Kevin McDonald (CEO, Alvaka Networks) has expressed direct interest. Alvaka manages approximately 1,200 endpoints across 40 clients. The demo runs live against their CrowdStrike environment — no integration required at the demo stage. Target: $14K/month MSSP license = $168K ARR Year 1.
IMMEDIATE
2
MSSP Channel — Three Target Partners
Identify 3 additional regional MSSPs for demo conversations. Target profile: 500–2,000 endpoints under management, CrowdStrike or SentinelOne EDR, existing compliance reporting need. Each converts at $8K–$24K/month. Pipeline target: $500K ARR from MSSP channel by end of year.
NEXT 60 DAYS
3
UK Ministry of Defence — Enterprise Opportunity
Active opportunity via UK MoD (see UK_MOD_OPPORTUNITY_REPORT.md). Defence incident response and kill chain analysis is a primary use case — the same threat model architecture applies directly. UK Ltd (Vantage Ltd) registration in progress to support MoD contracting. First meeting target: Q3 2026.
Q3 2026