# Exposure Management Finder > A finder for attack surface management (ASM) and exposure management tools: answer six questions to see which tool type fits (EASM discovery, exposure validation, exposure management platforms, CTEM programme support, WAF posture) and which vendors' published facts match. No scores or rankings. Vendor pages read 27 September 2026. ## Start here - [Exposure finder](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-finder): Six questions on subsidiaries, hosting, your current platform, exploit proof, WAFs and remediation capacity. See which exposure tool type fits and which vendors' published facts match. - [How we map](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/how-we-map): The rules behind the Exposure Management Finder, what Described and Not in our sources mean and our sources and limits. - [Tool types](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type): Five kinds of ASM and exposure management tool in plain terms: what each one does, when you need it, and which vendors describe it on their own pages. - [CTEM explained](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/ctem-explained): Continuous threat exposure management explained. ## Tool types - [EASM discovery](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type/easm-discovery): Finds the internet-facing assets you own, including ones nobody listed, and ties each to an owner. - [Exposure validation](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type/exposure-validation): Tests which exposures an attacker could actually exploit, from safe checks to continuous attack-style testing. - [Exposure management platforms](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type/exposure-management-platforms): Puts external findings next to internal vulnerability, cloud and asset data in one platform. - [CTEM programme support](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type/ctem-programmes): Supports a continuous cycle of scoping, discovery, prioritisation, validation and getting fixes done. - [WAF posture](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tool-type/waf-posture): Checks which assets your web application firewalls actually protect and turns new vulnerabilities into rules. ## Vendors - [Vendor notes](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes): Fact notes on every vendor the finder covers: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, pricing, strengths and limits. - [Censys ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/censys): Censys ASM is built on first-party scanning of all 65K ports and the Censys Internet Map, with the longest integration list in this set, from ServiceNow CMDB to Microsoft Sentinel and Tenable VM. - [Cortex Xpanse](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/cortex-xpanse): Cortex Xpanse is Palo Alto Networks' ASM product, scanning the whole IPv4 space several times a day by the vendor's account and acting on exposures through Active Response playbooks, with native ties to Cortex XSOAR and Prisma Cloud. - [CrowdStrike EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/crowdstrike-easm): CrowdStrike EASM, now sold under the Falcon Exposure Management brand, scans the internet around the clock, finds shadow IT and prioritises exposures with adversary intelligence and an Exposure Prioritization Agent, with guided remediation steps. - [CyCognito](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/cycognito): CyCognito starts from the organisation's name alone, attributes each asset to a subsidiary or brand with a trace of why, runs more than 100,000 active tests and retests after each fix. - [Hadrian](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/hadrian): Hadrian uses agentic AI to discover assets hourly or on events and, by its account, prove exploitability within 15 minutes, with automatic regression testing after fixes. - [IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/ionix): IONIX maps subsidiaries, brands and the digital supply chain, confirms exploitability with safe, non-intrusive tests and invokes compensating controls such as WAF rules, with re-validation of fixed items. - [Microsoft Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/microsoft-easm): Microsoft Defender EASM is the easiest start in this set: a prebuilt inventory, recursive discovery from seeds, a 30-day free trial and billing on the Azure bill. - [Rapid7 Surface Command](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/rapid7): Rapid7 Surface Command combines external discovery with an internal and external asset inventory (EASM plus CAASM) inside the Rapid7 Command platform, next to InsightVM and InsightCloudSec, and offers a public trial. - [Tenable Attack Surface Management](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/tenable): Tenable Attack Surface Management feeds Tenable One, putting external findings from a 5 billion+ asset map next to Tenable vulnerability data, attack paths and Hexa AI remediation workflows. - [watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/vendor-notes/watchtowr): watchTowr runs continuous automated red teaming with eight agents, re-tests the hour a new threat emerges, and pushes mitigation rules to seven named WAF and edge vendors through Active Defense. ## Head-to-heads - [Facts in columns](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/facts-in-columns): Pick two to five ASM and exposure management vendors and see their tool types, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing in one table. No scores. - [Censys vs Cortex Xpanse](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-cortex-xpanse): Censys ASM and Cortex Xpanse compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs CrowdStrike EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-crowdstrike-easm): Censys ASM and CrowdStrike EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs CyCognito](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-cycognito): Censys ASM and CyCognito compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs Hadrian](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-hadrian): Censys ASM and Hadrian compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-ionix): Censys ASM and IONIX compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-microsoft-easm): Censys ASM and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-rapid7): Censys ASM and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-tenable): Censys ASM and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Censys vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/censys-set-against-watchtowr): Censys ASM and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs CrowdStrike EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-crowdstrike-easm): Cortex Xpanse and CrowdStrike EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs CyCognito](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-cycognito): Cortex Xpanse and CyCognito compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs Hadrian](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-hadrian): Cortex Xpanse and Hadrian compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-ionix): Cortex Xpanse and IONIX compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-microsoft-easm): Cortex Xpanse and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-rapid7): Cortex Xpanse and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-tenable): Cortex Xpanse and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Cortex Xpanse vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cortex-xpanse-set-against-watchtowr): Cortex Xpanse and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs CyCognito](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-cycognito): CrowdStrike EASM and CyCognito compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs Hadrian](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-hadrian): CrowdStrike EASM and Hadrian compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-ionix): CrowdStrike EASM and IONIX compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-microsoft-easm): CrowdStrike EASM and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-rapid7): CrowdStrike EASM and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-tenable): CrowdStrike EASM and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CrowdStrike EASM vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/crowdstrike-easm-set-against-watchtowr): CrowdStrike EASM and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs Hadrian](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-hadrian): CyCognito and Hadrian compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-ionix): CyCognito and IONIX compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-microsoft-easm): CyCognito and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-rapid7): CyCognito and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-tenable): CyCognito and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [CyCognito vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/cycognito-set-against-watchtowr): CyCognito and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Hadrian vs IONIX](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/hadrian-set-against-ionix): Hadrian and IONIX compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Hadrian vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/hadrian-set-against-microsoft-easm): Hadrian and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Hadrian vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/hadrian-set-against-rapid7): Hadrian and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Hadrian vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/hadrian-set-against-tenable): Hadrian and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Hadrian vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/hadrian-set-against-watchtowr): Hadrian and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [IONIX vs Defender EASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/ionix-set-against-microsoft-easm): IONIX and Microsoft Defender EASM compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [IONIX vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/ionix-set-against-rapid7): IONIX and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [IONIX vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/ionix-set-against-tenable): IONIX and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [IONIX vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/ionix-set-against-watchtowr): IONIX and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Defender EASM vs Rapid7](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/microsoft-easm-set-against-rapid7): Microsoft Defender EASM and Rapid7 Surface Command compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Defender EASM vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/microsoft-easm-set-against-tenable): Microsoft Defender EASM and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Defender EASM vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/microsoft-easm-set-against-watchtowr): Microsoft Defender EASM and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Rapid7 vs Tenable ASM](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/rapid7-set-against-tenable): Rapid7 Surface Command and Tenable Attack Surface Management compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Rapid7 vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/rapid7-set-against-watchtowr): Rapid7 Surface Command and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. - [Tenable ASM vs watchTowr](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/tenable-set-against-watchtowr): Tenable Attack Surface Management and watchTowr compared on facts only: tool types described, exploit proof, WAF and edge, ticketing, platforms and pricing. No scores. ## Learn - [Exposure School](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school): Eight short lessons in four tracks: reading your exposure shape, proof, acting on findings, and running a programme. Written from public sources. - [Reading the Shape of Your Exposure Problem Before You Buy a Tool](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/reading-your-exposure-shape): Five questions that tell you whether your problem is finding assets, proving exposures, joining data, running a programme or keeping WAFs in step. - [Cloud, On-Premises and Edge: Where Internet-Facing Assets Live](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/where-internet-facing-assets-live): Why hosting changes what an exposure tool needs to see, and which tool types matter more in cloud, mixed and on-premises estates. - [Safe Checks or Attack-Style Testing: How Much Proof Do You Need?](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/safe-checks-or-attack-style-testing): The difference between non-intrusive exploitability checks and attack-style testing, what each costs you, and how vendors describe their approach. - [Retesting and Proof of Fix: How to Know an Exposure Is Closed](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/retesting-and-proof-of-fix): Why a closed ticket is not a closed exposure, how retesting and regression testing work, and which vendors describe them. - [Compensating Controls in Practice: WAF Rules, Edge Rules and Playbooks](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/compensating-controls-in-practice): How WAF rules, edge rules and response playbooks buy time while a fix is planned, what can go wrong, and which vendors describe applying them. - [Building on the Security Platform You Already Own](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/building-on-the-platform-you-own): When extending Tenable, Rapid7, Palo Alto Networks or Microsoft makes sense for exposure management, and when a specialist that connects to it is the better fit. - [Scoping a First CTEM Cycle You Can Actually Finish](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/scoping-a-first-ctem-cycle): How to choose the scope of a first continuous threat exposure management cycle, who needs to be involved, and what to report at the end. - [Writing a Proof of Concept Plan for Exposure Management Tools](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-school/writing-a-proof-of-concept-plan): How to run a fair proof of concept for ASM and exposure management tools: a fixed scope, known answers, the same questions for every vendor and a written result. - [Exposure terms](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-terms): A glossary of 43 terms used in attack surface and exposure management. - [Exposure FAQ](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-faq): 24 questions and answers on choosing and running exposure tools. ## The Exposure Desk - [The Exposure Desk](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk): Dated notes on ASM and exposure management. - [Acting at the Edge: How Three Vendors Describe Compensating Controls](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/acting-at-the-edge): WAF posture, edge rules and response playbooks: what IONIX, watchTowr and Cortex Xpanse describe for acting on an exposure before the fix ships. - [Nine Exposure Shapes, Different Answers: The Finder's Test Profiles](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/eight-shapes-eight-answers): We ran the finder on nine example organisations. Different shapes point to different tool types and vendors. Here is each result, computed, after our 11 October update. - [More CVEs, Same Exploitable Share: What FIRST's 2026 Forecasts Mean for Exposure Teams](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/cve-volume-and-the-exploitable-share): FIRST forecast a median of 59,427 CVEs for 2026 in February and about 66,000 in June, but says the exploitable share has not grown. What that means for tool choice. - [What Proof of Exploitability Means in 2026: Four Approaches Vendors Describe](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/what-proof-means-in-2026): Non-intrusive simulation, black-box testing, agentic attack testing and runtime validation: how four approaches to proving exposure differ, from vendor pages. - [Company Name, Seeds or a Prebuilt Inventory: How Discovery Starts at Five Vendors](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/how-discovery-starts): What each vendor needs from you before discovery begins, from a company name to seeds to a prebuilt inventory, and why it matters for a proof of concept. - [Tenable, Rapid7 and Palo Alto Networks: Where the Platform Vendors Stand on Exposure in 2026](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/platform-vendors-in-2026): What Tenable One, the Rapid7 Command platform and Cortex describe for exposure management, the announcements of 2026, and when a platform fits better than a specialist. - [The First 30 Days of an Acquired Company's Attack Surface: A Working Checklist](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/first-30-days-of-an-acquisition): A practical checklist for the internet-facing assets of a newly acquired company: inventory, ownership, edge protection, quick wins and the first CTEM cycle. - [Twelve Questions to Ask in Any Exposure Management Demo](https://exposuremanagementfinder.com/exposure-desk/questions-for-an-exposure-demo): Twelve questions, one per check the finder uses, to put to any ASM or exposure management vendor in a demo, and what a good answer looks like.