Loss scenario modelling
What a given event would actually cost you — the outage, the recovery, the liability, the revenue that does not come back.
Boards that keep being shown colours and want to know what is at stake.
They deliver alongside usCyber risk in rupees, not in a red-amber-green grid.
Cybercube quantifies cyber risk in financial terms — the loss, the likelihood, the range around both. We bring them in when a board, an insurer or a regulator wants a number rather than a colour.
A capability partner, not a product purchase. One scope and one invoice, with their specialists on the engagement.
What we work with
The products, and who each one suits.
5 listed
Quantification for insurance conversations
Turning exposure into figures an underwriter or broker will engage with, with the assumptions written down.
Organisations buying, renewing or arguing about cyber cover.
Third-party and concentration exposure
Where your loss depends on somebody else's outage — a cloud region, a payments provider, a shared vendor everyone in your sector uses.
Anyone whose critical systems sit in someone else's data centre.
Board and regulator reporting
Findings written for readers who do not run systems: assumptions stated, ranges given, no single false number.
Audit committees, risk officers and anyone filing to a regulator.
Remediation prioritisation
Ranking the fix list by the loss each item avoids, instead of by a scanner's severity label.
Security teams with a fixed budget and a list far longer than it.
What buying through us changes
A partnership is only worth what it changes.
Better than list
Modelling is people and days, and there is no list price to beat on days. What you get instead is one scope and one invoice through us rather than a second procurement. Where the work needs paid tooling or cloud from vendors we do resell, we place that — and there the price is better than list. Where it is people and days, you get one scope and one invoice through us instead of running a second procurement.
Named contacts
You meet the people doing the modelling and they are named in the scope. Questions about an assumption go to them, not into a queue.
Startup credits
Quantification is people and models, so there is nothing to award credits against. Where the same programme needs paid tooling or cloud, we sponsor those applications separately — the award is the vendor's decision.
How we help
The work around the product.
- Decide with you whether you need quantification at all, or whether an assessment and a fix list would answer the question more cheaply.
- Scope the work and write down the questions the model has to answer, so the output is usable when it lands.
- Assemble the inputs — asset inventory, dependencies, revenue at risk, incident history — so the model is fed evidence rather than guesses.
- Sit in the sessions and translate between the modellers and your engineers, in both directions.
- Take the output into remediation: sequence the work by the loss it avoids, and cost the fixes.
- Carry the findings into your board pack, insurance renewal or regulatory filing, in the language those readers use.
Where this is not the answer
Quantification does not make you safer on its own. It tells you where the money is; the fixing is still work, and still yours to fund. It is also the wrong first spend for a small organisation with obvious gaps — patch, back up, turn on MFA, then come back to modelling when the basics hold. The outputs are modelled estimates with assumptions attached, not predictions, and we present them that way rather than as a forecast. If all you need is a heat map to clear a tender, say so and we will not sell you a model.
Next step
Buying Cybercube? Talk to us first.
Tell us what you are trying to do and we will come back with the sizing, the licensing and the price — from a partner, within two working days.