Why Forttic is must-have when the carrier comes looking

Your insurer wants the timestamps. Forttic generates them from data your stack already produces.

When a cyber claim is denied, it's denied for what your controls were doing at incident time — not application time. Forttic discovers every backup asset and every cloud service configuration natively, then continuously enforces and timestamps the controls underwriters and forensic auditors compare against. Across every backup vendor and cloud.

01
Forttic harvests & discovers
Backup & cloud-service data
  • Snapshot inventory, retention & replication state (every backup vendor)
  • Encryption & immutability across vaults and storage
  • Vault permissions, access logs, credential isolation state
  • Compute, database, storage, network, IAM config — discovered natively
  • What runs where — workloads, dependencies, recovery topology
  • What's protected vs. what should be — coverage gaps surfaced automatically
  • Restore-test outcomes — timestamped, per workload
From every backup vendor + native cloud APIs · No CSPM dependency required
02
Forttic decides
Cross-cutting decisions
  • Are we insurance-renewal ready — and on what controls are we exposed?
  • Which workloads can't actually recover today?
  • Which production services are unprotected and shouldn't be?
  • Was an immutability lock tampered with — and by whom?
  • Are backup credentials isolated from production admin?
  • When was each critical workload last clean-room restored?
  • Can we rebuild the workload — not just restore the data?
  • Which CISO posture questions can be answered without a war room?
Made by Knowledge base · Memory · Skills · Triggers · Tools
03
Your organization gets
Measurable value
  • Denial-defense evidence — timestamped proof each control was live on the incident date, not just at application time
  • Silent-failure detection — the named drift pattern ("backup jobs failing silently") surfaced and remediated within guardrails
  • Higher resilience — drift remediated, recoveries proven, immutability protected
  • Cloud-ops recovery, not just data recovery — workloads come back, not just files
  • Lower cost — sprawl bounded, retention right-sized
  • Audit-prep eliminated — continuous, regulator-mapped evidence on demand
  • CISO questions answered directly — from live state, with the audit trail attached
  • Ransomware leverage removed — verified clean recovery, real-time tamper detection
No rip-and-replace · No new backup contracts · No CSPM integration required
Three forces. One gap.

Backup configuration is not enforcement. Policy attestation isn't proof.

01
Ransomware now targets backups first

The safety net became the leverage. Backups are the primary objective, not the recovery plan.

02
Regulators and insurers want continuous proof

DORA, NIS2, SOC 2 — all demand operating effectiveness over time. Cyber insurers audit forensically. 25-40%+ of claims are now denied for control drift.

03
No single tool governs across vendors

Backup vendors execute jobs. Posture tools observe. Neither acts cross-vendor. Continuous enforcement is the layer nobody else builds.

Why now

"Policy configured" used to be enough. Not anymore.

Ransomware operators, insurers, and regulators all caught up at the same time.

01 · The attackers

Ransomware now goes for backups first.

Backups went from the recovery plan to the primary objective. 96% of attacks target backups; 76% succeed. When they do, the median ransom doubles to $2.3M and victims pay 98%. The safety net became the leverage.

02 · The carriers

Cyber claims get denied for what's missing on the day.

Modern denials aren't about exclusions. They're about the gap between what you attested at application and what was running at incident. 25-40%+ of cyber claims are now rejected for that drift. "Backup jobs failing silently" is the named pattern. International Control Services v. Travelers set the precedent.

03 · The regulators

Periodic evidence stopped counting.

DORA Article 11 in force since January 17, 2025 — names backup as a governance issue. NIS2 transposed across the EU. SOC 2 Type II demands operating effectiveness over time. Common thread: continuous evidence is the new bar.

Any one of these would make continuous enforcement worth doing. All three at once make it inevitable.
96%
of ransomware attacks target backup repositories (Veeam)
2.3×
median ransom demand when backups are compromised (Sophos)
25-40%+
of cyber insurance claims denied for control drift or misrepresentation
DORA
Article 11 enforcement live since Jan 17, 2025 — backup named as a governance issue
Wave goodbye to

The old way of pretending your backup estate is fine.

Silent backup failures

Unverified recovery

Doubled ransom demands

Quarterly audit prep

Orphaned snapshot spend

Control drift between application and incident

Shadow backups

Misrepresentation denials

Silent backup failures

Unverified recovery

Doubled ransom demands

Quarterly audit prep

The economics

Keep your backup vendors. Forttic pays itself out of what you can't see.

Enforcement layer, not replacement. Paid back by orphaned snapshots, audit-prep that doesn't happen, ransom that doesn't double, claims that don't get denied.

Most AWS estates 5+ years old accrue 20-40% in orphaned EBS snapshot spend. Forttic finds the dollar figure in ~48 hours — verifiable against your Cost Explorer.

20-40%
typical orphaned and over-retained EBS snapshot spend in long-running AWS estates
2.3×
median ransom demand differential when backups are compromised (Sophos)
~weeks
to first timestamped Verify-stage records — not quarters
Product comparison · Where Forttic sits

Forttic doesn't replace any tool you own. It enforces what they do.

Every adjacent layer does its job. None enforces cross-vendor, cross-cloud. That's Forttic.

What each layer does (observation)

Backup posture management (CBPM) — scans, maps, reports. Sees the drift. The doing is left to you.
Backup vendors — execute inside their own stack. Can't govern vendors next to them.
Backup consoles — surface state for human review. You decide. You act. You log it.
CSPM / DSPM — security lens, not recovery. Not built for backup proof.
GRC platforms collect evidence periodically — not continuously, not for backup specifically
Recovery testing happens annually, in a war room, with the wrong assumptions
+

What Forttic adds on top (enforcement)

Closes the gap observation surfaces — bounded autonomy, audited every step
Vendor-neutral by structure — can govern across every backup vendor
Decides and acts — skills inside guardrails; every decision logged
Native cloud + backup discovery in one graph
Continuous evidence mapped to DORA, NIS2, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA
Tiered recovery verification — clean-room for tier-1, RTO/RPO measured

Ready to enforce recovery — not just observe it?

30-minute briefing. We'll walk through the CRE framework and run a gap analysis on your backup estate.

Book your briefing →