How We Assess External Cybersecurity Posture

Security DataPoint (SDP) provides a quantitative, externally-derived cybersecurity posture score for publicly traded U.S. companies — built for investors, insurers, and risk professionals who need a consistent, comparable benchmark.

Our Approach

SDP evaluates a company's cybersecurity posture using only information observable from the public internet — the same information available to any third party. We do not perform penetration testing, attempt to access protected systems, or rely on self-reported questionnaires.

Our data collection relies on two complementary approaches. The first uses standard internet protocols — including DNS, HTTP/HTTPS, SMTP, and TCP service checks — to observe an organization's externally facing infrastructure. These checks range from passive observation, such as reading public DNS records, to active probes, such as testing whether a service responds on a given port. All interactions use protocols as designed and are non-exploitative and non-destructive. The second draws on structured public disclosures that organizations make about themselves, including regulatory filings, published job listings, and corporate web presence. These are documents and statements the organization itself has chosen to make publicly available.

The result is an objective, outside-in assessment designed for comparability. Every company in our coverage universe is assessed with the same methodology, on the same scale, at regular intervals.

SDP scores represent an independent editorial assessment of externally observable cybersecurity posture. Scores are informational in nature and are not a security certification, a rating issued under any regulatory framework, or a guarantee of any particular security outcome.

Scoring Pipeline

Each company's score is produced through a four-stage process applied consistently across our entire coverage universe.

1

Footprint Discovery

We identify an organization's internet-facing assets — domains, hosts, mail infrastructure, and web properties — using publicly available records.

2

Signal Collection

Over a hundred and fifty discrete signals are collected across technical, procedural, and organizational dimensions — drawn from both infrastructure observation and public disclosures.

3

Finding Generation

Related signals are consolidated into scored findings, each weighted on a standardized scale and adjusted relative to the organization's footprint size.

4

Score Aggregation

Findings roll up into sub-categories, categories, and a single normalized score (0–100).

Context-Adjusted Scoring

Individual findings are scored on a standardized scale and adjusted relative to the size and complexity of the organization's internet-facing footprint. This adjustment works in both directions: it accounts for the fact that larger, more complex infrastructures naturally present a broader surface, while also recognizing that smaller footprints with concentrated issues may reflect proportionally higher risk. The goal is a fair comparison across organizations of different sizes, not an advantage or disadvantage for any particular scale of operation.


Transparency as a Scoring Factor

Our methodology distinguishes between two types of findings. The first type is a definitive detection — something is either present or it is not, and the determination is conclusive from the outside. A security.txt file is either published or it isn't. An SPF record is either configured or it isn't. For findings like these, the presence or absence itself is the finding.

The second type involves organizational and programmatic indicators — such as evidence of dedicated security leadership, investment in security tooling, or a formal vulnerability management program. For these, SDP does not claim to know whether an organization has such a program in place internally. What we assess is whether the organization's public disclosures and footprint provide stakeholders with the ability to verify it.

When that verification is not possible, a modest deduction is applied — not as an inference about the organization's internal capabilities, but as a reflection of the transparency available to external stakeholders. This reflects a broadly held view in the security community that disclosure and communication are components of a mature security program. The deduction is intentionally smaller than the weight given to confirmed technical findings, and organizations that wish to make additional information discoverable may do so through our profile claim process.

Infrastructure Attribution

SDP identifies and attributes infrastructure to assessed organizations through two independent discovery methods based on the nature of the organization's relationship to the underlying network resources.

Domain-Based Attribution

SDP enumerates domains and subdomains associated with the assessed organization using publicly available registration records, DNS resolution data, and regulatory filings. Infrastructure discovered through this method is attributed to the organization at the level of the individual network address identified — not the broader network range in which that address resides. This approach reflects the principle that an organization's DNS records represent deliberate, authoritative decisions to associate specific network endpoints with its public-facing identity.

Registration-Based Attribution

Where an organization is identified as the registrant of IP address space through authoritative Internet registry records (such as ARIN WHOIS and BGP routing data), all externally observable infrastructure within that registered space is attributed to the organization. This approach reflects the principle that registration of IP address space carries operational accountability for the security posture of that space, including any resources hosted on behalf of third parties or customers.

These two methods are complementary and may both contribute findings to a single assessment. Infrastructure discovered through domain-based attribution is scoped to the specific addresses identified. Infrastructure discovered through registration-based attribution is scoped to the full registered range. SDP does not claim visibility into infrastructure that is neither domain-associated nor registration-attributed to the assessed organization.

What We Evaluate

SDP collects over 150 signals across six signal categories. Each signal checks a specific, externally observable condition grounded in security practices broadly accepted across the cybersecurity industry.

Network Perimeter Security

Examines externally reachable services and network-level configurations. Findings in this category reflect whether services that are generally recommended to be restricted from public internet exposure are, in fact, publicly accessible.

Email Security

Evaluates the presence and configuration of email authentication standards (such as SPF, DKIM, and DMARC), encryption practices, and the security posture of mail infrastructure as observable from public DNS and mail server responses.

Web Application Security

Assesses publicly accessible web properties for use of outdated or end-of-life technologies, missing security headers, unintentional information disclosure, and the presence of software components with known published vulnerabilities.

Encryption & Certificate Management

Reviews the health of TLS/SSL implementations including certificate validity and expiration, cipher suite strength, and proper encryption configuration across publicly facing services.

Security Governance & Policy

Identifies externally visible indicators of security program maturity — drawing on published security policies, coordinated vulnerability disclosure programs, regulatory filings, leadership disclosures, and job postings that reflect organizational investment in cybersecurity capabilities.

Domain & Infrastructure Governance

Evaluates DNS security practices, domain registration protections, and the management of foundational internet infrastructure, as observable through public registration records and DNS responses.

Coverage universe. SDP currently assesses publicly traded U.S. companies across nano-, micro-, small-, and mid-cap segments — the market tiers where external cybersecurity visibility is most limited and most needed.

How Signals Become Scores

The six signal categories above describe what SDP observes. The four assessment categories below describe how those observations are scored. This structure is applied identically across all assessed companies.

External Infrastructure & Application Security

Covers the security of internet-facing services and public-facing web applications — the infrastructure an adversary would probe first.

Security Governance & Disclosure Signals

Evaluates externally visible evidence of security governance maturity and the organization's history of publicly disclosed cybersecurity incidents.

Security Leadership & Workforce Signals

Evaluates externally observable indicators of organizational investment in cybersecurity talent and leadership, drawn from corporate disclosures and published job posting data.

Jurisdictional Context

Evaluates geographic dimension of an organization's internet-facing infrastructure, drawing on geolocation data.

Methodology Principles

Non-Intrusive & Non-Destructive
All data is collected using standard, publicly available internet protocols. Some observations are passive — such as reviewing DNS records or reading HTTP headers — while others involve active checks, such as testing whether a service responds on a given port or whether a mail server supports encryption. In all cases, SDP uses protocols as designed, does not attempt to exploit vulnerabilities, bypass access controls, or disrupt operations in any way. No credentials are guessed, no payloads are delivered, and no access beyond what the service voluntarily responds with is sought.
Consistent & Repeatable
Every company in our coverage universe is assessed using an identical, programmatic methodology. Automated processes remove subjective judgment from individual evaluations, ensuring that comparisons across companies and over time are meaningful and reproducible.
Proportional & Fair
Findings are contextualized relative to infrastructure scale. The same adjustment model is applied uniformly to all companies, and it is designed to neither systematically advantage nor disadvantage organizations of any particular size.
Grounded in Accepted Practice
The signals and findings that comprise our methodology address the same areas of concern covered by widely adopted cybersecurity frameworks, assessed through the lens of what is externally observable.
Versioned & Transparent
Our methodology evolves to reflect the changing threat landscape. When material changes are made to the scoring model, they are versioned, documented, and communicated to subscribers in advance of taking effect. Historical scores remain tied to the methodology version under which they were generated.

Understanding the Score

The SDP score is a normalized value from 0 to 100 representing the relative strength of a company's externally observable cybersecurity posture, where a higher score reflects a stronger posture. It is designed to be one input among many in a broader risk assessment process.

Scores are most valuable when used comparatively — benchmarking a company against its industry peers, tracking an organization's posture over time, or identifying material differences in security maturity across a portfolio. Whether you are screening sectors, monitoring holdings, evaluating an insurance applicant, or flagging posture changes for further review, the SDP score provides a consistent quantitative baseline where one may not otherwise exist.

Inherent Limitations

External observation, by definition, captures only what is visible from outside an organization. Companies may maintain robust internal security programs, compensating controls, or contextual factors that are not observable from the public internet.

A lower score does not mean an organization is insecure, just as a higher score does not guarantee the absence of internal vulnerabilities.

Additionally, because our footprint discovery relies on publicly available records, it is possible in rare cases for an asset to be incorrectly attributed to an organization, or for a legitimate asset to be missed. The depth of assessment may also vary where applicable laws restrict certain types of network observation. We maintain processes to minimize attribution errors and welcome corrections through our profile claim process (see below).

For Assessed Organizations

SDP is committed to accuracy and fairness. Any organization that is the subject of an SDP assessment may claim their profile to access the detailed findings underlying their score. This includes the specific assets attributed to the organization and the individual findings identified on each.

Organizations that have claimed their profile may submit corrections or additional context through a structured review process. Common grounds for review include asset misattribution, findings that do not reflect the current observable state of the infrastructure, and supplemental context that may be relevant to interpretation.

All reviews are evaluated based on what is externally observable at the time of re-assessment. SDP aims to acknowledge all review requests within five business days and to resolve them within thirty calendar days.

Security DataPoint posture scores constitute an independent editorial assessment based on externally observable signals. Scores are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice, a security certification, or a guarantee of any company's cybersecurity posture. The absence of observed signals does not imply the absence of risk. The presence of observed signals does not imply confirmed compromise.  Security DataPoint LLC is not a registered investment adviser, broker-dealer, or Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO).