Portal
The full scenario and evidence picture.
The evidence layer for security & compliance teams
Know which threats matter. Have the evidence to act.
Relevant threat scenarios, clear next steps and the evidence behind your decisions. Delivered where your team already works.
Have a scenario, concern or question? That's enough to get started.
- Slack
- Teams
- Portal
- Claude
- MCP
Trusted where being wrong is expensive
I stopped forwarding threat reports to my team. Dedicated scenarios now arrive in our channel already sorted, and the audit trail writes itself.
You choose channels where it works for you and your team.
One relevant scenario. The reason it matters. A clear next step. All in the channel your team already watches.
Venation workspaceSearch
14 September
VenationAPP
Microsoft TeamsSearch
14 September
Venation
Relevant to you: Ransomware via third-party vendor compromise
Why: Tier 1 supplier holds standing admin access into production.
Gap: backup isolation evidence needs validation.
Validate scenario evidence with the Tier 1 vendor
Reply
Venationonline14 September
Venation
Ransomware via third-party vendor compromise is relevant to you. Your Tier 1 supplier holds standing admin access.
Backup isolation evidence still needs validating.
Who owns that?
Head of Third-Party Risk. Want me to open it and assign, due 12 Oct?
Is ransomware via third-party vendor compromise relevant to us?
Relevant to you: Ransomware via third-party vendor compromise
Why: Tier 1 supplier holds standing admin access into production.
Gap: backup isolation evidence needs validation.
Validate scenario evidence with the Tier 1 vendor
EV-2026-0914
// your assistant, via MCP
> venation.scenario("ransomware via supplier")
{
"scenario": "Ransomware via third-party vendor compromise",
"relevance": "high",
"because": [
"tier-1 supplier with standing admin access",
"EU operations, regulated customers"
],
"gap": "backup isolation evidence not validated",
"last_reviewed": "2026-09-14",
"evidence_ref": "EV-2026-0914"
}
One scenario. You pick the surface.
Teams are overwhelmed by information, not short of it. Leaders need scenario-based evidence: what could happen, where you are exposed, and what to fix.
Information overload
Feeds, reports, alerts and audit questions pile up while board expectations rise and resources shrink.
No clear risk logic
Work is spread across tools and teams, with no shared view of which risks matter most.
Evidence comes too late
Evidence is usually reconstructed after incidents, or produced under pressure during audits.
Many signals and sources
Fewer, relevant scenarios
Clear decisions and evidence
NIS2, DORA and the Cyber Resilience Act require critical and regulated European firms, and the suppliers they depend on, to test themselves against realistic attack scenarios and show their reasoning. Most build those scenarios by hand, once a year, and they go stale instantly. Venation keeps them current, integrates in your workflow, ranks what matters as threats shift, and leaves you the evidence when the regulator asks.
One relevant scenario. A clear next step. The reasoning and evidence connected.
Hundreds of fragments arrive each week. Only some describe a threat to you.
Actor
Ransomware affiliate
Region
Western Europe
Technique
Valid accounts via supplier access
Sector
Retail
Vector
Phishing campaign
Sector
Financial services
Technique
Exploited VPN appliance
Vector
Remote management tool
Actor
Hacktivist group
For entities with threat-led testing requirements
Your threat intelligence report was accurate on the day it arrived.
Every threat-led test starts with a Targeted Threat Intelligence report. Weeks of analyst work, a set of scenarios, and a PDF. Then the test runs, the report is filed, and the threat landscape carries on without it. At the next cycle, someone builds it again from scratch. We have a better way.
Today · one test cycle
- TTI report delivered
- Test performed
- Report rebuilt from scratch
Report filed, scenarios age, nothing updates (≈ 10 months)
With Venation · the same cycle
Scenarios reviewed every 90 days
Updated within 5 working days of a material change
The next test starts from something that is already current
The report you already buy. Current all year.
What current means to us
- Scenario review
- At least every 90 days, with the date on the page.
- Material threat change
- Reaches affected clients within 5 working days.
- Sector targeting
- A named actor triggers a relevance re-score within 48 hours.
How each judgement is made
- Relevance decisions
- Each cites at least one fact from your environment profile.
- Scenario mapping
- ECB TTI structure, ATT&CK and your register category.
- Analyst sign-off
- Every judgement signed by a named senior analyst, recorded in the trail.
What we deliver
Curated once. Held in one core. Installed where you work.
- scenarios
- threat actors
- evidence
structured, versioned, reviewed
platform core
agentic + human analysts
One source, delivered to
- Slack
- Teams
- MCP
- Portal
Curation
Content as code.
Distribution
One platform core.
Integration
Installed in the existing workflow.
A useful first conversation.
Bring us a scenario, concern or question. We'll help you explore what it could mean for your organisation.