GENELLIPSE
Connect cyber security, enterprise risk and compliance through shared evidence and accountable workflows.
GeneSecure connects cyber, cloud, identity, vendor, compliance and enterprise-risk information in a shared command center. Its modules bring risk assessment, control evidence and response workflows together, with Cortex AI preparing work for human review.
Confirm the capabilities and configuration appropriate to your requirements.
Bring syslog, endpoint events, cloud audit, and network signals together in a governed store.
Version detections as code, test them against historical events, and hunt across retained telemetry.
Support analyst-led investigation with AI-assisted triage, permission-aware actions, and an audit record of each step.
Genellipse plans a focused MVP within 6 weeks. Agree the outcome, interfaces, access, client reviewers, and acceptance criteria at the start. Use the delivered evidence to decide the next stage.
A named process owner, representative examples, current measures, and the constraints the solution must meet.
An agreed workflow, tested configuration, findings, operational responsibilities, and a recommendation for the next phase.
Evaluate a security investigation from a meaningful signal to a documented containment decision and validated recovery. The outcome is an explainable response that respects business impact, not simply more alerts.
Connect approved telemetry to asset criticality, identity, exposure, and known business activity. Review visibility gaps and log quality before promising detection coverage.
Correlate evidence, form a hypothesis, and assess alternative explanations. Use AI assistance to organize information while analysts decide whether the evidence supports escalation.
Agree who may isolate an asset, disable access, or change a control. Preserve evidence, assess service impact, validate recovery, and feed lessons back into detection and response.
Security tooling may have privileged access to sensitive environments. Review least privilege, administrative segregation, secrets, telemetry retention, audit trails, and containment authority. Evaluate the actual deployed coverage and integrations rather than assuming universal protection.
Document telemetry sources, collection gaps, identity and asset integrations, and response interfaces. Test loss of a feed and loss of access to a response tool.
Escalate uncertain findings and potentially disruptive actions. Human approval and documented emergency authority should reflect the organization’s incident plan.
Measure analyst investigation effort, false escalations, evidence completeness, time to authorized containment, and recovery validation. Faster alert closure is not useful if meaningful threats are dismissed.
Bring sanitized incident examples, the asset and identity model, telemetry samples, current response playbooks, and approved containment boundaries.
Include visibility assumptions, investigation evidence, analyst decisions, response tests, recovery checks, and control improvements with accountable owners.