Industry solution

Security, Defense & Intelligence

From first signal to released assessment, one accountable picture for every watch

Fusion, alert triage, containment, posture and releasable sharing working as one system for SOCs, fusion cells and multi-agency teams.

Products
8
Challenges
6
Concepts
15
Talk to us about Security & IntelAsk a question
Analysts in a night-time operations room reviewing a harbor map, alert queues and a report on large screens
IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)SemanticFed(opens SemanticFed in a new tab)FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)AdapterCloud(opens AdapterCloud in a new tab)AssetHandler(opens AssetHandler in a new tab)VibeControls(opens VibeControls in a new tab)BigConsole(opens BigConsole in a new tab)Botlit(opens Botlit in a new tab)

The problem

Why the picture is hard to keep current and accountable

Watch floors fuse feeds by hand, alerts arrive without an owner, containment waits on a phone call and partner releases are redacted by hand, so the picture a commander reads is late and hard to trace.

Security operations centers, fusion centers and intelligence cells run on a chain of separate tools: feeds and partner reports in one place, the alert queue in another, the asset register in a third, runbooks in shared folders, briefing slides in a fourth, and releases to partners by email. Each tool works for the team that owns it. The picture a commander reads is stitched together by hand between them, usually at night and usually under time pressure.

The pressure is structural. Reporting arrives with different reliability, formats and handling caveats, and conflicting accounts of the same vessel, person or host are normal. Alerts name an IP address, not an owner. Containment can take a mission system offline, so it needs a second pair of eyes. And the same assessment often has to reach partners who are cleared for some of it but not all of it.

Governance runs through all of it: classification and need-to-know, a record of who saw what, change control on mission networks, and a security posture that has to stand up to review. On defense mission networks that posture is formal: systems operate under an authority to operate, and every accepted risk has to be tracked in a plan of action and milestones until it is closed. Most teams meet these obligations by hand, so experienced analysts and engineers spend their best hours reconstructing provenance, redacting documents and chasing evidence instead of analyzing.

Who this is for

  • Watch floor or operations center director

    One current picture across shifts, handovers that carry context, and a command brief that is live rather than rebuilt overnight.

  • All-source analyst and fusion cell lead

    Partner and sensor reporting fused onto one entity model, with confidence, provenance and conflicting reports surfaced, not averaged away.

  • SOC manager

    Getting from alert to accountable owner quickly, containment with a named approver, and one case record from detection to closure.

  • CISO or security governance lead

    Knowing exposure to a new advisory the same morning, risk acceptances that carry a recorded reason, and audit evidence that is already assembled.

  • Disclosure and partner liaison officer

    Releasable versions prepared paragraph by paragraph, partner access that expires, and a record of every disclosure to every agency.

  • Mission system owner or cyber protection team lead

    Keeping mission networks' authority to operate: a live inventory, drift caught early, and risk acceptances that feed the plan of action and milestones.

A day in the life

The story behind the solution

One watch at a port-city fusion center

Imani Okoro runs the watch floor at Greyharbor Joint Fusion Center, where port police, the regional cyber unit, the port authority's security team and a coast guard liaison share one operations room. The center watches the container terminal, the fuel berths and the port-side networks around the clock. Tonight a tanker with an unclear history is expected alongside at dawn, and the night shift is two analysts and one SOC engineer.

  1. Tuesday, 02:40

    Two reports, one tanker, a silent feed

    Analyst Mateo Ruiz has the tanker MT Corvina Star on one screen and a column of pasted exports on the other. When the watch officer asks whether the ship is at anchor or alongside, Mateo says, "Depends which report you believe, and right now I can't tell you which one I believe." Nobody on the floor has noticed that one of the feeds went quiet hours ago.

    How this is solved: Partner and sensor reporting that will not fuse

  2. Tuesday, 03:15

    An alert that names an address, not an owner

    Hana Kobayashi, the SOC engineer on shift, is looking at a beaconing alert from an internal address nobody on the floor recognizes. She starts down the contractor call list at 03:20, one voicemail after another. When someone finally picks up, she still has to ask the question she most needs answered: what breaks if I pull this box?

    How this is solved: Alerts that name an address, not an owner

  3. Tuesday, 03:50

    Containment waits for a phone call

    Hana has the two changes typed and ready. Samuel Adeyemi, the on-call deputy CISO, is the only person who can say yes, and his phone rings out twice before he answers, half asleep, with "Go ahead." Hana types "approved by SA, verbal" into the chat thread and hopes that will be enough in the morning.

    How this is solved: Containment that waits for a phone call

  4. Tuesday, 06:30

    An advisory lands before the day shift

    Samuel is still at his kitchen table when a vendor advisory reaches his inbox at 06:30. He sends one message to the engineering and infrastructure leads: are we exposed, and can you tell me by 08:00? The replies say "checking," "probably not us" and one screenshot of a dependency file from a single repository.

    How this is solved: An advisory lands and nobody knows the exposure

  5. Tuesday, 07:40

    A brief that is stale before it is read

    Imani is on her third round of slide edits when the port confirms the tanker is alongside Berth 7 and cargo transfer has begun. At 08:00 the commander asks the one question the deck cannot answer: have the port networks seen this domain before? Imani adds it to a list of things to chase once the room clears.

    How this is solved: A command brief that is stale before it is read

  6. Tuesday, 10:15

    Three partners, three versions of one assessment

    Priya Nair, the disclosure officer, has three partners waiting and one assessment written for none of them. She works through it with three blank documents and the clearance list pinned beside her monitor. At 11:40 she sends the third email and turns to the backlog of partner requests.

    How this is solved: One assessment, three partners, three redacted copies

None of these moments needs a bigger watch floor. They need the feed, the entity, the alert, the asset, the approval, the brief and the release to share one accountable record, so Imani's next shift starts from what actually happened. That shared record is what the products on this page are designed to provide together.

Challenges and how they are solved

6 problems, several products, one connected answer

Each challenge shows the problem as it happens, how the products are designed to hand work to each other, and the concepts that illustrate it. Share any challenge on its own.

Challenge 1 of 6

Partner and sensor reporting that will not fuse

IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)SemanticFed(opens SemanticFed in a new tab)

The problem

At 02:40 Mateo is building the picture on a tanker due alongside at dawn. Reporting comes from a commercial vessel-tracking feed, the harbor police watch log, a partner agency's written report, the port's berth schedule and an OSINT sweep, each in its own format. The watch-log feed stopped updating at 22:05 and nothing flagged it. The partner report puts the tanker at anchor, but the berth schedule shows it moved from anchorage to Berth 7 at 01:50. Mateo exports everything into a spreadsheet, loses track of which line came from which source, and cannot say how confident the assessment is or why.

What it costs

Assessments reach decision-makers late, with confidence and provenance lost in the stitching, and a silent feed can leave a gap nobody knows is there.

How the products work together

FluidGrids is designed to run the ingest: scheduled and webhook-triggered workflows pull each feed, including threat-intelligence feeds in STIX, normalize it and post it to IntelWatchtower as observations tagged with source and handling label. IntelWatchtower keeps every source with a reliability score and every feed with its ingest status, so the watch-log feed is designed to show as stale once it stops. Where a partner will not hand over bulk data, SemanticFed is designed to answer specific lookups, such as a vessel registry entry or a berth record, by querying the partner's store in place under that partner's row and column policy, and the answer is cited back into IntelWatchtower as corroborating evidence. IntelWatchtower is then designed to show conflicting reports about the entity side by side with their sources, and to record which account the analyst accepted and why.

The outcome it is designed for

One entity record per vessel, person or host, every claim traced to its source, silent feeds visible as they fail, and conflicts resolved by an analyst on the record.

The concepts behind it

Challenge 2 of 6

Alerts that name an address, not an owner

IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)AdapterCloud(opens AdapterCloud in a new tab)AssetHandler(opens AssetHandler in a new tab)

The problem

At 03:15 the SIEM flags beaconing from an internal address to a domain on the regional threat list. Hana can see the traffic and the indicator, but not the system behind it. The asset spreadsheet says the address belongs to a print server retired last spring, the cloud console knows nothing about it, and the network diagram is two years old. Forty minutes of calls later she learns it is a gateway for the terminal operating system, run by a contractor team, with the crane scheduling service and the gate system depending on it. Until then, nobody could say what isolating it would break.

What it costs

Every minute spent finding an owner is a minute the adversary keeps, and containment decisions are made without knowing what depends on the host.

How the products work together

The detection tool's alert is designed to be posted into IntelWatchtower by a FluidGrids workflow, where it is tied to the indicator and the entity it implicates, so triage starts with why it fired. The implicated address or hostname is designed to hand off to AdapterCloud, which matches it against the inventory AdapterCloud keeps across its connections, shows the resource's direct dependencies, is designed to trace the wider blast radius, and lists any open policy violations or drift on it. From there, the resource is designed to link to the matching configuration item in AssetHandler, which is designed to hold the named owner and to carry the incident Hana opens against that item. The incident reference is designed to flow back into the IntelWatchtower case, so the intelligence thread and the service-management thread stay linked.

The outcome it is designed for

The triage note names the system, its owner and what depends on it early in the response, and the case and the incident point at each other.

The concepts behind it

Challenge 3 of 6

Containment that waits for a phone call

FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)Botlit(opens Botlit in a new tab)IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)AdapterCloud(opens AdapterCloud in a new tab)AssetHandler(opens AssetHandler in a new tab)

The problem

At 03:50 Hana knows what she wants to do: block the domain at the egress proxy and disable the service account the gateway is using. The runbook is last year's PDF, and it does not say whether the gateway can be isolated without stopping the gate system. The emergency change needs the on-call deputy CISO's approval, and when it comes it is spoken, not recorded. Hana makes the changes by hand and logs them in a chat thread, which someone will have to rebuild into a case record and a change record in the morning.

What it costs

Containment is slow when it should be fast and informal when it should be careful, and the evidence of who approved what lives in phone logs and chat.

How the products work together

Botlit is designed to give the SOC a runbook assistant that answers from the center's own playbooks and past case notes, cites the passage it used, and says plainly when the runbooks do not cover a situation. The containment itself runs as a SOAR-style FluidGrids playbook designed to gather the indicator from IntelWatchtower and the dependency summary from AdapterCloud, attach the runbook passage, then pause before any blocking step and send a named approver a request on desktop or phone with the evidence attached. When the approver accepts in FluidGrids, the playbook is designed to run the block, record the approval on the AssetHandler emergency change against the configuration item, and write each step to the IntelWatchtower case journal. Botlit agents can also trigger the playbook directly, so the question and the action stay in one trail.

The outcome it is designed for

Containment starts with a named approver on the record, the approval sits on the emergency change, and the case journal shows every step without anyone rebuilding it the next morning.

The concepts behind it

Challenge 4 of 6

An advisory lands and nobody knows the exposure

VibeControls(opens VibeControls in a new tab)AdapterCloud(opens AdapterCloud in a new tab)AssetHandler(opens AssetHandler in a new tab)FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)

The problem

At 06:30 a vendor advisory describes a parsing flaw in a messaging library used by integration services across the port. Samuel, the deputy CISO, needs three answers before the 08:00 brief: which systems run an affected version, which of them are reachable from outside, and who owns each fix. The software list is a spreadsheet the development teams update when they remember. The infrastructure inventory lives in three consoles. Last quarter's risk acceptances for unpatched systems are in email, with no owner and no review date. By 09:00 the team has a partial list and a lot of guesses.

What it costs

Exposure windows stay open longer than they need to, risk acceptances pile up without review, and posture evidence has to be rebuilt every time someone asks.

How the products work together

VibeControls keeps the catalog of mission software components with owners, can attach a software bill of materials to each build, and is designed to track per-environment versions, so the advisory can be matched to the components and environments that carry the affected library. Each production match is designed to hand off to AdapterCloud, which maps the component to the hosts that run it, where a security policy is designed to flag the ones behind an internet-facing load balancer and record a violation with evidence. AssetHandler is designed to carry each patch as a change request with per-reviewer approvals. A system that cannot be patched in time is waived in AdapterCloud as a risk acceptance with a recorded reason, ready for the plan of action and milestones, and a scheduled FluidGrids workflow can return each one to its owner on a set review cadence.

The outcome it is designed for

The exposure question is answered from shared records the same morning, every fix has a named owner and a change request, and every risk acceptance carries its reason and comes back for review.

The concepts behind it

Challenge 5 of 6

A command brief that is stale before it is read

IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)FluidGrids(opens FluidGrids in a new tab)BigConsole(opens BigConsole in a new tab)Botlit(opens Botlit in a new tab)

The problem

The 08:00 command brief is a slide deck the night shift starts at 05:00, pasting screenshots from the alert queue, the map, the case list and the patch spreadsheet. By 07:40 half of it is out of date: the beaconing is contained, two new alerts are open and the vessel picture has changed. In the room, follow-up questions, such as how many critical exposures are still open, get the same answer: someone will check after the meeting.

What it costs

Decisions ride on a picture that is hours old, and the watch floor spends the last hours of a shift building slides instead of watching.

How the products work together

IntelWatchtower's common operating picture puts tracked entities, threat scores and recency on one shared map, so the brief opens on the live picture rather than a screenshot. FluidGrids workflows are designed to pull alert counts and feed health from IntelWatchtower, open exposures from AdapterCloud and VibeControls, and containment results from their own runs, and to land them in BigConsole data sinks. BigConsole is designed to turn them into a watch and posture console whose Explain panel states what changed since the last shift, with each finding cited to the data behind it. In the room, a Botlit agent is designed to answer the commander's follow-up questions from that console and the center's knowledge bases of past cases and runbooks, with citations, and to say plainly when the records do not hold an answer.

The outcome it is designed for

The brief runs on the live picture, follow-up questions get cited answers in the room, and the night shift spends its last hour watching instead of building slides.

The concepts behind it

Challenge 6 of 6

One assessment, three partners, three redacted copies

IntelWatchtower(opens IntelWatchtower in a new tab)SemanticFed(opens SemanticFed in a new tab)BigConsole(opens BigConsole in a new tab)

The problem

At 10:15 the assessment on the tanker and the beaconing has to reach the port authority's security team, a neighboring agency and the coast guard liaison. Each is cleared for a different part: the port authority can see the network findings but not the partner source, and the neighboring agency can see the vessel history but not the terminal's internal addresses. The report carries no portion marking, so every paragraph is judged by hand and redacted in a separate copy for each recipient. When one partner asks for the underlying vessel records a day later, the extract is built again by hand, and the only record of what went where is a sent folder.

What it costs

Hand redaction is slow and error-prone, over-sharing and under-sharing both carry real cost, and a disclosure that cannot be evidenced erodes partner trust.

How the products work together

IntelWatchtower is designed to hold releasability on the report itself through portion marking: each paragraph carries a handling label, a TLP marking where it applies and a releasable-to list, the disclosure officer reviews a generated version for each partner paragraph by paragraph, and every release is written to a disclosure log. When a partner needs the data behind the assessment, SemanticFed is designed to serve it through row filters and column masking attached to that partner's role, so internal addresses and protected sources stay inside the boundary and each query is audited. For partners who follow the situation over days, BigConsole is designed to share a partner-safe console with per-person access and an expiry date instead of a weekly spreadsheet attachment.

The outcome it is designed for

Each partner receives a version prepared paragraph by paragraph, partner data access is designed to follow policy rather than hand-built extracts, and every disclosure is on the record.

The concepts behind it

How it fits together

How the products hand off from first signal to partner release

Follow one thread through the center: a fused picture and an alert become an owned system, an approved containment, a live brief and a partner release, with each product designed to do one job and pass a record to the next.

  1. To AdapterCloud: The implicated address or hostname from the triaged alert.

  2. To AssetHandler: The resource, its blast radius and the linked configuration item.

  3. To FluidGrids: The incident and the draft emergency change awaiting approval in the playbook.

  4. To BigConsole: Containment results, alert counts and feed health in BigConsole data sinks.

  5. To Botlit: Console figures the brief agent can query.

  6. To IntelWatchtower: Reviewed brief points for the finished assessment.

  7. To SemanticFed: Partner roles whose follow-up data questions run through SemanticFed policies.

Step 1 of 8: Fuse feeds and take alerts

Products in this solution

What each product brings

  • IntelWatchtower

    Fusion, alerts, cases, the COP and release

    Its data model already spans sources, feeds, requirements, entities, indicators, alerts, cases, missions and reports, each carrying classification, confidence and provenance, which is the spine a watch floor works from.

    Visit IntelWatchtowerAll concepts

  • SemanticFed

    Governed cross-agency queries in place

    Is designed to query partner and agency stores where they live, applying row filters, column masking and an audit trail at the query edge, so questions can be answered without bulk copies crossing a boundary.

    Visit SemanticFedAll concepts

  • FluidGrids

    Feed ingest and approved containment playbooks

    Its connectors, schedules, webhooks and resumable runs suit feed normalization and containment playbooks designed to wait for a named approver, and its datasinks feed BigConsole.

    Visit FluidGridsAll concepts

  • AdapterCloud

    Live inventory, blast radius and security policy

    Keeps one inventory of resources discovered or reported across cloud, Kubernetes, on-prem, edge and network connections, maps their dependencies, and records policy violations and drift with evidence and a reasoned waiver path.

    Visit AdapterCloudAll concepts

  • AssetHandler

    Owners, incidents and change control

    Is designed to hold configuration items with owners and dependencies and to run incidents and change requests with approvals against them, which is where containment and patching become accountable.

    Visit AssetHandlerAll concepts

  • VibeControls

    Mission software catalog and advisory exposure

    Catalogs components with owners, attaches SBOMs and release gates to builds through its security plugins, and is designed to track which version runs in each environment.

    Visit VibeControlsAll concepts

  • BigConsole

    Watch and posture consoles, partner sharing

    Builds consoles on governed data sinks, and is designed to explain what changed with citations, mask sensitive fields and share consoles with per-person access and an expiry date.

    Visit BigConsoleAll concepts

  • Botlit

    Grounded runbook and brief assistant

    Agents are designed to answer from the center's own knowledge bases with citations and to decline when nothing matches; they can query dashboards and trigger FluidGrids workflows.

    Visit BotlitAll concepts

One platform underneath: Burdenoff Workspaces

Burdenoff Workspaces is the shared foundation: one sign-on for analysts, SOC engineers, commanders and partner liaisons, role-based access per product and workspace, one audit trail across every alert, approval, change and release, and one bill.

Concept gallery

Every concept in this solution

15 concepts from 8 products. Each one links to its own page on the product's website, and every view has a link you can share.

Pitch kit

The Security & Intel solution in one minute

Watch floors lose time and trust in the gaps between tools. Burdenoff is designing these products to connect on one workspace: IntelWatchtower for fusion, alerts, cases and release, FluidGrids and SemanticFed to bring partner data in under policy, AdapterCloud and AssetHandler to turn an alert into an owned system, VibeControls for advisory exposure, and BigConsole with Botlit for a live, cited brief.

  • Designed so partner, sensor and OSINT reporting fuse onto one entity model, with confidence, provenance and conflicts on the record
  • Designed so alerts resolve to a live system, its owner and its blast radius before anyone isolates it
  • Designed so containment playbooks pause for a named approver on desktop or phone, with every step in the case journal
  • Designed so an advisory maps to real components and hosts, with patches under change control and risk acceptances reasoned
  • Designed so each partner receives a paragraph-level releasable version, with policy-governed data access and a log of every disclosure
Email it

Questions

Frequently asked

Is this a live, deployed solution?

No. This page describes a solution concept: how these Burdenoff products are designed to work together for security, defense and intelligence teams. The products are in early access or pre-launch, some capabilities shown here, such as releasability controls, are on product roadmaps, and several hand-offs between products are designed rather than built-in integrations today. We are happy to walk through what exists now.

Can it handle classified information, and does it hold security accreditations?

Every IntelWatchtower record carries a classification label and every action is audited, and deployments are designed to be configurable to jurisdiction and sovereignty needs, including dedicated tenancy. The products hold no security certifications or accreditations today, and this page does not claim any. Whether a deployment is suitable for a given classification level is a decision for your accrediting authority.

Do we have to replace our SIEM, endpoint tools or existing feeds?

No. The intent is to sit alongside the tools you already run. FluidGrids workflows are designed to connect existing feeds and systems, SemanticFed is designed to query data where it already lives, and IntelWatchtower becomes the place where alerts, entities, cases and reports meet. Detection and endpoint tools keep doing their jobs.

How does sharing with partner agencies stay under control?

Releasability is designed to live on the report itself through portion marking, paragraph by paragraph, with a reviewed version for each partner and a disclosure log. Partner data access is designed to run through SemanticFed row and column policies rather than hand-built extracts, and shared BigConsole consoles are designed to expire. Release decisions stay with your disclosure officers.

Can AI agents take containment actions on their own?

Not in this design. Botlit is designed to answer from your own runbooks with citations and can start a FluidGrids playbook, but any block or account change is designed to pause for a named human approver, and IntelWatchtower's planned AI proposals, such as suggested threat scores, are designed to change nothing until an analyst accepts them.

Where should a team start?

A practical starting point is one thread: register sources and feeds in IntelWatchtower, connect the infrastructure inventory in AdapterCloud, and link alerts to owners in AssetHandler. Releasability, advisory exposure and the live brief can follow once the watch floor trusts the core picture.

Related domains

Where these products also work together

All domains

Want to explore this for your organization?

Tell us about your setup. We will walk you through the products involved and scope a pilot around the challenge that hurts most.

Talk to usBrowse every domain

This is a solution concept: it shows how Burdenoff products are designed to work together in this industry. The images are illustrations of the concepts, not screenshots of the actual products, and every name and figure in them is sample data.