Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. Resilience

Resilience

enriched
GRC & Compliance Automation

cyberresilience.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Do you work at Resilience?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on Resilience's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of Resilience we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 6 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Limited

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 2 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Headquarters location not disclosed on their site
  • Limited

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 1 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 4 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
  • Not checked

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 0 of 3

    We have not checked what this vendor discloses publicly yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Resilience.

  • Not checked

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 0 of 2

    We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Resilience.

Data coverage: 19/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal20/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness13/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 20This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 13

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

Cyber risk mgmt platform quantifying risk in financial terms using real loss data AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL202320242025CVE-2025-1146 · HIGH 8.1 · 2025-02-13CVE-2022-31006 · HIGH 7.5 · 2022-09-09

Known CVEs (4)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2025-53366 ↗2025

    The MCP Python SDK, called `mcp` on PyPI, is a Python implementation of the Model Context Protocol (MCP). Prior to version 1.9.4, a validation error in the MCP SDK can cause an unhandled exception whe…

  • CVE-2025-53365 ↗2025

    The MCP Python SDK, called `mcp` on PyPI, is a Python implementation of the Model Context Protocol (MCP). Prior to version 1.10.0, if a client deliberately triggers an exception after establishing a s…

  • CVE-2025-1146 ↗HIGH 8.12025

    CrowdStrike uses industry-standard TLS (transport layer security) to secure communications from the Falcon sensor to the CrowdStrike cloud. CrowdStrike has identified a validation logic error in the F…

  • CVE-2022-31006 ↗HIGH 7.52022

    indy-node is the server portion of Hyperledger Indy, a distributed ledger purpose-built for decentralized identity. In vulnerable versions of indy-node, an attacker can max out the number of client co…

Resources & materials (5)

discovered on their site

Datasheets, whitepapers, and case studies found on cyberresilience.com by the enrichment loop. Links open the original documents on the vendor's own site.

  • pdfResilience Case Study Holding Company Sep 2025↗
  • pdfResilience Case Study Biotechnology 2 Apr 2025↗
  • pdfResilience Case Study Government Oct 2024↗
  • pdfResilience Case Study Transportation Jan 25 1↗
  • pdfResilience Case Study Technology Apr.2025↗

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
3rdcomply3rdRisk Solutions B.V.6clicksA-LIGNAcuity Risk ManagementAdaptive SecurityAirrivedAllgressAmpcusAmplifier SecurityAnecdotesAnitian

Products (1)

GRC & Compliance Automation

1
  • Resilience The Edge SolutionAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Cyber risk mgmt platform quantifying risk in financial terms using real loss data