FINDER · SIX QUESTIONS
Exposure management finder: which kind of ASM tool fits your problem?
SHORT ANSWER
Answer six questions and the finder weighs five tool types (EASM discovery, exposure validation, exposure management platforms, CTEM programme support and WAF posture), plots the shape of your answers, then checks each vendor's published facts against them. Every rule is written out on How we map. The page opens with an example team's answers; change any answer to see your own result.
Your answers point to Exposure validation
- Outer point: described on the vendor's pages we read
- Inner point: not in our sources (it may exist; we did not find it)
- Amber outline: the shape of your answers
- EASMpicked for your answersDiscovery4 pts
- VALpicked for your answersProof6 pts
- PLATPlatform2 pts
- CTEMpicked for your answersProgramme6 pts
- WAFEdge2 pts
Start here
- Exposure validation 6 pts+2 another vendor's scanner · +3 safe exploitability checks · +1 a growing backlog
Also relevant
- CTEM programme support 6 pts+1 several brands or business units · +1 another vendor's scanner · +1 safe exploitability checks · +3 a growing backlog
- EASM discovery 4 pts+3 several brands or business units · +1 mixed cloud and on-premises hosting
Lower on your list or not suggested
- Exposure management platforms 2 pts+2 mixed cloud and on-premises hosting
- WAF posture 2 pts+2 one WAF or CDN vendor
Vendors whose published facts match
Ordered by how many of your checks each vendor's own pages satisfy. Equal fits are listed alphabetically. This is a fit to your answers, not a quality ranking.
Equal fit
IONIXEqual fitMatches 4 checks fully, 0 partly, 1 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Matches
Describes agentic corporate, subsidiary and brand discovery and attributes each asset to a subsidiary or business owner, including assets that arrive through M&A.
Source: IONIX homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Matches
Non-intrusive exploit simulations.
Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Matches
Delivers WAF rules for new CVEs into remediation workflows.
Source: IONIX WAF Posture Management · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Integrations with Jira, ServiceNow, Slack, Splunk and Cortex XSOAR.
Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the IONIX vendor note
watchTowrEqual fitMatches 4 checks fully, 0 partly, 1 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Matches
Maps assets to subsidiaries, brands and M&A.
Source: watchTowr platform · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Matches
Automated red teaming confirms which exposures are exploitable.
Source: watchTowr platform · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Matches
Active Defense sends rules to Cloudflare, Akamai, Imperva, F5, Fortinet, Check Point and Citrix.
Source: watchTowr platform · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Ticketing and workflow with Atlassian, ServiceNow, Freshworks, Ivanti, Linear, PagerDuty, Torq and Zendesk.
Source: watchTowr platform · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the watchTowr vendor note
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Matches
CyCognitoMatches 3 checks fully, 0 partly, 2 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Matches
Every finding carries a trace of how it was found and why it belongs to the subsidiary, brand or business unit.
Source: CyCognito discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Matches
Active black-box tests with no brute force or state changes.
Source: CyCognito active security testing · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Owner-linked workflows with ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk.
Source: CyCognito remediation acceleration · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the CyCognito vendor note
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Matches
HadrianMatches 2 checks fully, 1 partly, 2 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
Hadrian lists a mergers and acquisitions assessment add-on for Atlas; ownership is confirmed by machine learning.
Source: Hadrian pricing (re-read) · Read 13 Oct 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Matches
Proves exploitability with agentic testing.
Source: Hadrian technology · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Automatic ticket creation, with Jira, ServiceNow, GLPI, Slack, Microsoft Teams, SentinelOne, Datadog and Zendesk.
Source: Hadrian integrations · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the Hadrian vendor note
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
Equal fit
Rapid7 Surface CommandEqual fitMatches 1 checks fully, 2 partly, 2 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Not in our sources
- Internal as well as external assets Matches
Combines external visibility (EASM) with a unified asset inventory (CAASM).
Source: Rapid7 Surface Command · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Exploitability checked Partly
Runtime validation for cloud vulnerabilities in Exposure Command, announced March 2026.
Source: Rapid7 press release: runtime validation and DSPM for Exposure Command · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Partly
Remediation workflows and SLAs at higher tiers; SOAR-ready integrations.
Source: Rapid7 Surface Command · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the Rapid7 Surface Command vendor note
Tenable Attack Surface ManagementEqual fitMatches 1 checks fully, 2 partly, 2 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Not in our sources
- Internal as well as external assets Matches
Tenable One includes vulnerability management alongside external attack surface data.
Source: Tenable: buy · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Exploitability checked Partly
Attack path analysis across 150+ techniques in Tenable One, not exploit testing.
Source: Tenable One · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Partly
Tenable One Advanced lists orchestrated remediation through manual or automated ticketing workflows.
Source: Tenable One pricing · Read 11 Oct 2026
- Read the Tenable Attack Surface Management vendor note
Censys ASMMatches 1 checks fully, 1 partly, 3 not in our sourcesDescribes 3 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Not in our sources
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Partly
Reachability confirmation and EPSS and KEV scoring, not exploitation.
Source: Censys external exposure management · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Auto-creates, routes and tracks remediation tasks.
Source: Censys external exposure management · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the Censys ASM vendor note
Cortex XpanseMatches 1 checks fully, 1 partly, 3 not in our sourcesDescribes 2 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
Identifies the stakeholders for third-party exposures; subsidiary attribution is not described.
Source: Cortex Xpanse attack surface management · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Not in our sources
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Matches
Routing and remediation through Cortex XSOAR playbooks.
Source: Cortex Xpanse attack surface management · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the Cortex Xpanse vendor note
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
Microsoft Defender EASMMatches 0 checks fully, 2 partly, 3 not in our sourcesDescribes 2 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
Every asset carries a state (Approved Inventory, Dependency, Monitor Only, Candidate, Requires Investigation) based on connection strength and confidence; cross-tenant access is not supported.
Source: Microsoft Learn: what is discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Not in our sources
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Partly
Data connectors to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer trigger remediation actions downstream.
Source: Microsoft Learn: data connections · Read 27 Sep 2026
- Read the Microsoft Defender EASM vendor note
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Partly
CrowdStrike EASMMatches 0 checks fully, 0 partly, 5 not in our sourcesDescribes 2 of 3 picked tool types
- Subsidiary and owner attribution Not in our sources
- Internal as well as external assets Not in our sources
- Exploitability checked Not in our sources
- Works through your WAF or edge Not in our sources
- Routes findings to owners and tickets Not in our sources
- Read the CrowdStrike EASM vendor note
How does the finder decide?
Two steps. First, each answer adds points to the tool types it makes more relevant; the highest becomes your starting type and the amber shape shows the balance. Second, each vendor gets points for describing your picked tool types and for matching your constraints. The full rule table is on How we map. A vendor marked Not in our sources may still offer something; we did not find it on the pages we read, so ask the vendor.
Questions readers ask
Why does the finder point me to CTEM programme support?
Because your answers about a growing backlog, subsidiaries or several WAF vendors add up to a coordination problem as much as a tooling one. CTEM programme support means tools that cover discovery, prioritisation, validation and getting fixes done in one cycle.
Why are some vendors shown as an equal fit?
Their published facts satisfy your checks to the same degree. We list equal fits alphabetically rather than invent a tiebreak.
What does Not in our sources mean?
We did not find that capability or fact on the vendor pages we read in September 2026 and updated on 11 October 2026. It may exist; it counts zero in the finder, not a penalty, and the vendor notes say so.
Does the finder store my answers?
No. Answers live in the page's address bar so you can share a result. Nothing is sent anywhere.