Find. Prove. Fix. Credential.
Qtonic Quantum is in the business of quantum cyber risk and vulnerability intelligence. QScout finds cryptographic exposure, QStrike proves materiality through governed forward-threat demonstration, QSolve fixes the CryptoAgility migration sequence, and QLab credentials readiness evidence as clients move from current state to hybrid state to post-quantum state.
Most organizations start with QScout by Qtonic Quantum. From there, QSight by Qtonic Quantum adds deeper authorized public-surface evidence, QStrike by Qtonic Quantum proves materiality, and QSolve by Qtonic Quantum governs remediation, owner alignment, and CryptoAgility migration.
Primary products
QScout extensions
Key takeaway: /services now owns the execution progression and product ladder. /solutions remains the vertical hub for who Qtonic Quantum serves.
Continuous Monitoring That Understands Quantum
Point-in-time assessments tell you where you stood on scan day. QScout runs continuously.
- Daily Quantum Exposure Score (0-100)
- Drift detection with quantum impact analysis
- Breach matching against threat feeds and credential dumps
- CryptoAgility migration progress tracking
- Adversary timeline update alerts
Alert Channels
When adversary timeline estimates update, you know.
See PQC implementationsWhen China's estimate moves from 2031 to 2030, every customer sees what that means for their exposure window.
Eight Days to Your Quantum Exposure Window
Authorization
Provide targets. Domains, IP ranges. Confirm authorization and data sensitivity windows.
Reconnaissance
Passive mapping. External attack surface, subdomains, certificates, exposed services. Nine threat intel sources.
Quantum Analysis
Estimate Quantum Exposure Window. Model adversary capability projections. Cross-reference data sensitivity.
Validation Review
Cross-check findings, pressure-test evidence, and synthesize a confidence-weighted assessment.
Deliverables
Executive summary, technical findings, adversary visualization, remediation roadmap, PQC migration guide.
Single domain: 3-5 days. Enterprise up to 100 domains: 1-2 weeks. Continuous monitoring: ongoing.
What You Receive
Every engagement produces board-ready artifacts. No ambiguous findings—actionable intelligence with documented evidence chains.
QScout Deliverables
Scoped assessment
- Cryptographic Bill of Materials (CBOM)
- Quantum Exposure Window estimate per system
- Compliance gap matrix (PCI-DSS 4.0.1, HIPAA, SOC 2, NIST, ISO 27001)
- Board-ready executive summary PDF
- Prioritized CryptoAgility remediation roadmap (severity-ranked)
- SARIF + JSON findings export for SIEM integration
- Re-validation available under the engagement plan
QStrike Deliverables
90-120 day engagement
- Full forward-threat demonstration report
- Provider-aligned modeled profile results (IBM Quantum, IonQ, Quantinuum, Rigetti, QuEra, and D-Wave)
- Proof-of-concept exploitation evidence
- Detailed SARIF + JSON findings export
- $2M Challenge eligibility determination
- Ongoing monitoring configuration
- Quarterly re-assessment option
Want to see the format before you commit? Redacted sample reports available under NDA during engagement scoping.
Request a sample report →Quantum Coverage by Surface
QScout's 26 crypto + PQC modules include 9 quantum-labeled modules organized into four buyer-readable groups so teams can see where exposure sits: prioritization, public cryptography, application logic, and cloud or operational systems.
Exposure & Prioritization
What is exposed today, how urgent it is, and which issues deserve board attention first.
Quantum Vulnerability ScannerIdentifies encryption vulnerable to Shor's algorithm
HNDL CalculatorCalculates your Harvest Now, Decrypt Later exposure window
PQC Blueprint ReporterGenerates migration roadmaps prioritized by data sensitivity
External Crypto DriftDetects cryptographic configuration changes over time
TLS, Certificates & Email
Public-facing cryptography, protocol posture, hybrid PQC adoption, and communications infrastructure.
TLS PQC ScannerDetects post-quantum cipher suite support
Hybrid TLS ScannerIdentifies classical/PQC hybrid deployments
Certificate Policy CheckerValidates certificates against PQC readiness
Email Encryption ScannerAssesses S/MIME and PGP configuration
TLS Termination MapperMaps where TLS terminates: CDN, load balancer, or origin
Code, Dependencies & Applications
Where weak cryptography and migration blockers hide inside application logic and third-party packages.
Source Code Crypto AnalyzerStatic analysis finds hardcoded algorithms in source
Dependency Crypto ScannerScans dependencies for vulnerable crypto libraries
JavaScript Crypto AnalyzerDetects client-side cryptographic libraries and weak implementations
Cloud, Containers & Operations
Keys, registries, clusters, and delivery systems that determine whether migration work will stick in production.
Key Management & Vault InventoryMaps where keys live for migration planning
Container Cryptography ScannerScans container images for vulnerable crypto configurations
Registry Crypto InventoryInventories crypto across container registries
CI/CD Pipeline Crypto AuditorAudits CI/CD pipelines for crypto misconfigurations
Kubernetes Crypto ScannerScans Kubernetes secrets and TLS configurations
SIEM Crypto Event IngestorAnalyzes SIEM logs for crypto-related security events
The grouped view is for buyers and operators. The technical section below exposes the evidence model, severity logic, and output artifacts behind each module. View all 70+ modules.
The Number Your Board Needs
Other scanners say:
“TLS 1.2 with ECDHE. Good.”
QScout says:
“TLS 1.2 with ECDHE. Quantum vulnerable. 2029 readiness/control date applies. Data with 15-year confidentiality window already inside the quantum harvest tail. Scenario loss exceeds risk appetite.”
Try explaining Shor's algorithm to a board member. Watch their eyes glaze.
Now try this: “We have total cryptographic exposure inside the 2029readiness/control window. Our data sensitivity window is 15 years. The scenario loss exceeds our risk appetite.”
They understand probability. They understand expected loss. They understand tail risk.
QScout gives them the number. Not a physics lecture. Not a prediction-a scenario-weighted exposure model.
See full Board Number methodologyTechnical Module Details
Each module maps technical evidence to buyer-readable risk, severity, and remediation guidance.
Quantum Risk Classification Matrix
| Classification | Meaning | Example Algorithms |
|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Broken by Shor's algorithm | RSA, ECDSA, ECDH, DSA, Ed25519, X25519 |
| HIGH | Weakened by Grover's (halved security) | AES-128, SHA-1, DES |
| MEDIUM | Moderate quantum risk | AES-192, paramiko, cryptography |
| LOW | Minimal risk / PQC-ready | AES-256, ChaCha20, bcrypt, argon2 |
| QUANTUM_SAFE | NIST PQC algorithms | ML-KEM (Kyber), ML-DSA (Dilithium), SLH-DSA (SPHINCS+) |
Four Probability Models, Not One
We don't predict when quantum computers will break encryption. Nobody can. We model probability distributions across four adversary programs so you can assess tail risk against your specific data sensitivity windows.
China
2029-2033 (est.)$15B+ government quantum investment (McKinsey/ICV Research, largest globally). Published breakthroughs in qubit counts and error correction.
Relevant if you hold: Financial services, semiconductor IP, pharmaceutical R&D, trade secrets
Russia
2031-2035 (est.)Different technical approach. Active signals intelligence collection.
Relevant if you hold: European energy infrastructure, financial networks, corporate communications
North Korea
2033-2037 (est.)Will acquire capability through espionage rather than development.
Relevant if you hold: Cryptocurrency exchanges, financial institutions, supply chain IP
Iran
2034-2036Constrained quantum program. Active HNDL collection against regional targets.
Relevant if you hold: Regional infrastructure, energy sector
Why These Probability Ranges
- Global Risk Institute, December 2024. 32 quantum computing experts surveyed. Qtonic Quantum normalizes external distributions to a 2029 readiness/control planning horizon; we use their scenarios, not our own predictions.In a 2025 survey of 147 CISOs, only 1% of Fortune-1000 companies had funded quantum cybersecurity programs (Qtonic Quantum Research, May 2025).
- We don't predict dates. We model probability distributions. A 5% chance of catastrophic, irreversible exposure is a tail risk that exceeds standard enterprise risk appetite. That's actuarial math, not fear.
- Regulatory posture confirms the tail. NIST IR 8547 (initial public draft) targets deprecation of quantum-vulnerable algorithms by 2030 and disallowance by 2035. Major enterprises and regulators are acting. Early movers gain competitive advantage in compliance and customer trust.
Left-Tail Risk Compounds
You don't need to believe quantum break is imminent. You need to accept that catastrophic, irreversible data exposure inside your retention window exceeds any reasonable risk appetite, especially when the fix is available now and the damage is unpatchable after the fact.
Harvest Now, Decrypt Later makes timing irrelevant:
Adversaries collecting encrypted data today don't need quantum computers today. They need them before your data sensitivity window closes. A 50-year patient record transmitted in 2024 is vulnerable to any quantum capability achieved before 2074.
Regulatory posture confirms the risk:
NIST IR 8547 (initial public draft) targets deprecation of quantum-vulnerable algorithms by 2030 and disallowance by 2035. PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and SOC 2 frameworks are incorporating quantum readiness requirements. Regulated industries face the earliest compliance pressure.
Cannot be remediated retroactively:
Unlike software vulnerabilities, cryptographic exposure cannot be remediated once decryption occurs. Once data is decrypted, it's permanent. This is what makes left-tail quantum risk fundamentally different from other cyber threats.
Expected Value Calculation
Sources: Global Risk Institute 2024, IBM Cost of a Data Breach 2024. Even at low-probability assumptions, the exposure case can justify immediate cryptographic review.
Generates Compliance Artifacts
QScout public intake provides a verified website snapshot; QScout Silver or Gold can add approved audit-supporting artifacts for cryptographic assessment controls in PCI-DSS 4.0.1, HIPAA, SOC 2, NIST 800-53, and ISO 27001. Governed deliverables can include technical findings, compliance mapping, remediation sequencing, and board-ready risk assessment. Re-validation is available under QScout Pulse or an approved engagement plan.
PCI-DSS 4.0.1
Requirement 11.4 external security assessment
HIPAA
Technical evaluation under 164.308(a)(8)
SOC 2 Type II
Security testing with methodology documentation
ISO 27001:2022
A.12.6.1 technical vulnerability management
CMMC 2.0
Level 2+ security assessment requirement
FedRAMP Rev 5
FedRAMP-scoped assessment support available
NIST CSF 2.0
PR.DS controls for cryptographic testing
ITAR
Export control cryptographic assessment under 22 CFR 120-130
SOX
Section 404 IT general controls testing
GDPR
Article 32 technical measures evaluation
SWIFT CSP v2026
CSP 2.1/2.3 security assessment
CNSA 2.0
PQC algorithm readiness testing
Compliance Deliverable Package
Executive summary with CVSS scores
Methodology statement (PTES + OWASP)
Scope and authorization record
Evidence package with screenshots
Request/response logs
Signed attestation letter
Remediation verification report
PQC migration recommendations
Adversarial Model Validation
Traditional scanners report findings. QScout can apply adversarial review workflows to confidence-weighted assessments when that workflow is enabled.
Red Agent
Prosecutes. Proves findings are worse than assessed. Finds exploitation chains, adjacent vulnerabilities, data sensitivity factors that increase severity.
Blue Agent
Defends. Proves findings are overblown. Checks compensating controls, limited exploitability, low-value targets.
Arbiter
Synthesizes. Weighs both arguments. Produces confidence-weighted assessment. Critical findings are reviewed through opposing validation paths where that workflow is enabled.
Nine Sources. One Synthesis.
Traditional tools query sources individually. QScout synthesizes them with quantum overlay, adversary relevance, and business context.
Temporal Correlation
Track configuration changes over time, not just current state
Cross-Source Deduplication
Same finding from three sources equals higher confidence
Quantum Overlay
Every finding gets a quantum exposure timestamp
Adversary Relevance
This matters to China. This doesn't matter to ransomware gangs
Business Context
Industry-specific compliance implications surface automatically
Assessment Results
Representative assessment patterns from QScout and QStrike scopes. Public examples are fictionalized composites; buyer-specific proof is reviewed under NDA.
Request Reference Call (NDA Available)Financial Services Composite
Scoped
cryptographic exposure inventory
2029
Quantum Exposure Window (estimated)
Sequenced
PQR advisory path via QSolve
Defense Composite
Reviewed
high-severity findings before delivery
Mapped
harvest-now-decrypt-later exposure signals
Documented
compliance evidence for buyer review
Healthcare Composite
50 yr
data sensitivity window (patient records)
TLS
configuration evidence reviewed by scope
Board-ready
risk narrative and migration sequencing
Evidence-reviewed
high-severity findings before buyer delivery
On-time
delivery tracked against committed assessment timelines
Re-validated
high-severity findings reviewed before delivery
8
Days to board-ready deliverables
What Skeptical Buyers Ask
Direct answers to the questions enterprise security leaders, procurement officers, and technical evaluators ask before engaging.
Have a question not answered here?
Contact our team for specific requirementsSubject Matter Network
Intelligence-grade discipline applied to enterprise cryptography. References available under NDA.
“I spent my career in environments where encryption failure means mission failure.”
“Every other tool tells you what's broken today. QScout tells you what breaks next, how severe the exposure could be, and where to spend your budget first.”
“What stands out across these environments isn't a lack of encryption, but a lack of prioritization. Quantifying that difference is what turns quantum readiness from a theoretical concern into an actionable program.”
“The question isn't whether quantum disruption will reshape cybersecurity. It's whether leadership teams have a plan in place before that moment arrives.”
“Forty years in semiconductors taught me that vulnerabilities hide where people stop looking.”
Subject Matter Experts & Leadership
The Full Stack
QScout vs QStrike vs QSolve
QScout
Start here for external cryptographic discovery and board-ready risk framing.
- Purpose
- First-step risk measurement
- Engagement model
- Fast scan + deeper tiers
- Entry path
- QScout approved-scope snapshot
- Provider-aligned validation
- Not included
- CBOM delivery
- Guided tiers
- Board Number metric
- Included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Not included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Not included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
QStrike
Use this for operator-led forward-threat validation and exploit evidence.
- Purpose
- Forward-threat validation
- Engagement model
- 90-120 day engagement
- Entry path
- Scope review
- Provider-aligned validation
- Included
- CBOM delivery
- Scoped artifacts
- Board Number metric
- Included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Not included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
QSolve
Use this when you need governed migration sequencing, stakeholder coordination, and execution discipline.
- Purpose
- Migration governance
- Engagement model
- Governed program execution
- Entry path
- Program design
- Provider-aligned validation
- Not included
- CBOM delivery
- Uses prior outputs
- Board Number metric
- Not included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Not included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
| Capability | QScout | QStrike | QSolve |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose | First-step risk measurement | Forward-threat validation | Migration governance |
| Engagement model | Fast scan + deeper tiers | 90-120 day engagement | Governed program execution |
| Entry path | QScout approved-scope snapshot | Scope review | Program design |
| Provider-aligned validation | Not included | Included | Not included |
| CBOM delivery | Guided tiers | Scoped artifacts | Uses prior outputs |
| Board Number metric | Included | Included | Not included |
| Exploit proof-of-concepts | Not included | Included | Not included |
| PQC migration roadmap | Not included | Not included | Included |
| Federal compliance docs | Included | Included | Included |
Most organizations start with QScout, then move to QStrike when the measured evidence warrants provider-aligned validation, and use QSolve when migration sequencing and execution need formal governance. Enterprise customers may bundle all three. Explore our full solutions catalog.
QStrike
Contact
Rehearsal under adversarial assumptions. Stress test your infrastructure against quantum attack scenarios using provider-aligned validation workflows and governed evidence review, not just theoretical models. This is not "automated magic": it's workflow orchestration plus analyst-driven validation.
- RSA, ECC, AES vulnerability testing
- Six commercial execution platforms across four modalities
- Published-benchmark calibration kept outside the execution set
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
QSolve
Governance & Execution
QSolve turns measured exposure and validated risk into governed migration execution. It keeps vendors, internal teams, compliance owners, and leadership working from the same prioritized sequence on the path to post-quantum readiness by 2029.
- Migration sequence governance
- Cross-team execution coordination
- NSM-10 and EO 14028 & CISA PQC audit-supporting documentation
- Board-level risk communication
Fits Your Existing Stack
QScout integrates with your security tools. Findings flow into existing workflows. No rip-and-replace.
SIEM / SOAR
Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Palo Alto XSOAR, IBM QRadar
EDR / XDR
CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Microsoft Defender
Cloud Security
AWS Security Hub, Azure Defender, GCP Security Command
Identity
Okta, Azure AD, CyberArk, HashiCorp Vault
Network
Palo Alto NGFW, Cisco Umbrella, Cloudflare, Zscaler
Vulnerability Mgmt
Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 InsightVM
Ticketing
ServiceNow, Jira, PagerDuty
Communication
Slack, Microsoft Teams, Email, Webhooks
QScout vs. Alternatives
Traditional Pen Test
Contact Us
- 2-6 week engagement
- No quantum analysis
- No adversary modeling
- Point-in-time only
- Manual report, no synthesis
- No guarantee
QScout
Contact Us
- Rapid scoped deliverables
- Dedicated quantum-risk and PQC analysis
- Adversary-informed risk modeling
- Continuous monitoring options
- Evidence-backed findings and executive reporting
- Compliance mapping support
Doing Nothing
Unmeasured today
- $4.88M average breach cost (IBM/Ponemon 2024)
- Undocumented tail risk to board
- Compliance gap growing
- Cryptographic Debt expanding daily
- Insurance exclusion risk
- Irreversible if wrong
Quantum modules and coverage
Quantum Coverage by Surface
QScout's 26 crypto + PQC modules include 9 quantum-labeled modules organized into four buyer-readable groups so teams can see where exposure sits: prioritization, public cryptography, application logic, and cloud or operational systems.
Exposure & Prioritization
What is exposed today, how urgent it is, and which issues deserve board attention first.
Quantum Vulnerability ScannerIdentifies encryption vulnerable to Shor's algorithm
HNDL CalculatorCalculates your Harvest Now, Decrypt Later exposure window
PQC Blueprint ReporterGenerates migration roadmaps prioritized by data sensitivity
External Crypto DriftDetects cryptographic configuration changes over time
TLS, Certificates & Email
Public-facing cryptography, protocol posture, hybrid PQC adoption, and communications infrastructure.
TLS PQC ScannerDetects post-quantum cipher suite support
Hybrid TLS ScannerIdentifies classical/PQC hybrid deployments
Certificate Policy CheckerValidates certificates against PQC readiness
Email Encryption ScannerAssesses S/MIME and PGP configuration
TLS Termination MapperMaps where TLS terminates: CDN, load balancer, or origin
Code, Dependencies & Applications
Where weak cryptography and migration blockers hide inside application logic and third-party packages.
Source Code Crypto AnalyzerStatic analysis finds hardcoded algorithms in source
Dependency Crypto ScannerScans dependencies for vulnerable crypto libraries
JavaScript Crypto AnalyzerDetects client-side cryptographic libraries and weak implementations
Cloud, Containers & Operations
Keys, registries, clusters, and delivery systems that determine whether migration work will stick in production.
Key Management & Vault InventoryMaps where keys live for migration planning
Container Cryptography ScannerScans container images for vulnerable crypto configurations
Registry Crypto InventoryInventories crypto across container registries
CI/CD Pipeline Crypto AuditorAudits CI/CD pipelines for crypto misconfigurations
Kubernetes Crypto ScannerScans Kubernetes secrets and TLS configurations
SIEM Crypto Event IngestorAnalyzes SIEM logs for crypto-related security events
The grouped view is for buyers and operators. The technical section below exposes the evidence model, severity logic, and output artifacts behind each module. View all 70+ modules.
The Number Your Board Needs
Other scanners say:
“TLS 1.2 with ECDHE. Good.”
QScout says:
“TLS 1.2 with ECDHE. Quantum vulnerable. 2029 readiness/control date applies. Data with 15-year confidentiality window already inside the quantum harvest tail. Scenario loss exceeds risk appetite.”
Try explaining Shor's algorithm to a board member. Watch their eyes glaze.
Now try this: “We have total cryptographic exposure inside the 2029readiness/control window. Our data sensitivity window is 15 years. The scenario loss exceeds our risk appetite.”
They understand probability. They understand expected loss. They understand tail risk.
QScout gives them the number. Not a physics lecture. Not a prediction-a scenario-weighted exposure model.
See full Board Number methodologyTechnical Module Details
Each module maps technical evidence to buyer-readable risk, severity, and remediation guidance.
Quantum Risk Classification Matrix
| Classification | Meaning | Example Algorithms |
|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Broken by Shor's algorithm | RSA, ECDSA, ECDH, DSA, Ed25519, X25519 |
| HIGH | Weakened by Grover's (halved security) | AES-128, SHA-1, DES |
| MEDIUM | Moderate quantum risk | AES-192, paramiko, cryptography |
| LOW | Minimal risk / PQC-ready | AES-256, ChaCha20, bcrypt, argon2 |
| QUANTUM_SAFE | NIST PQC algorithms | ML-KEM (Kyber), ML-DSA (Dilithium), SLH-DSA (SPHINCS+) |
Adversary and compliance model
Four Probability Models, Not One
We don't predict when quantum computers will break encryption. Nobody can. We model probability distributions across four adversary programs so you can assess tail risk against your specific data sensitivity windows.
China
2029-2033 (est.)$15B+ government quantum investment (McKinsey/ICV Research, largest globally). Published breakthroughs in qubit counts and error correction.
Relevant if you hold: Financial services, semiconductor IP, pharmaceutical R&D, trade secrets
Russia
2031-2035 (est.)Different technical approach. Active signals intelligence collection.
Relevant if you hold: European energy infrastructure, financial networks, corporate communications
North Korea
2033-2037 (est.)Will acquire capability through espionage rather than development.
Relevant if you hold: Cryptocurrency exchanges, financial institutions, supply chain IP
Iran
2034-2036Constrained quantum program. Active HNDL collection against regional targets.
Relevant if you hold: Regional infrastructure, energy sector
Why These Probability Ranges
- Global Risk Institute, December 2024. 32 quantum computing experts surveyed. Qtonic Quantum normalizes external distributions to a 2029 readiness/control planning horizon; we use their scenarios, not our own predictions.In a 2025 survey of 147 CISOs, only 1% of Fortune-1000 companies had funded quantum cybersecurity programs (Qtonic Quantum Research, May 2025).
- We don't predict dates. We model probability distributions. A 5% chance of catastrophic, irreversible exposure is a tail risk that exceeds standard enterprise risk appetite. That's actuarial math, not fear.
- Regulatory posture confirms the tail. NIST IR 8547 (initial public draft) targets deprecation of quantum-vulnerable algorithms by 2030 and disallowance by 2035. Major enterprises and regulators are acting. Early movers gain competitive advantage in compliance and customer trust.
Left-Tail Risk Compounds
You don't need to believe quantum break is imminent. You need to accept that catastrophic, irreversible data exposure inside your retention window exceeds any reasonable risk appetite, especially when the fix is available now and the damage is unpatchable after the fact.
Harvest Now, Decrypt Later makes timing irrelevant:
Adversaries collecting encrypted data today don't need quantum computers today. They need them before your data sensitivity window closes. A 50-year patient record transmitted in 2024 is vulnerable to any quantum capability achieved before 2074.
Regulatory posture confirms the risk:
NIST IR 8547 (initial public draft) targets deprecation of quantum-vulnerable algorithms by 2030 and disallowance by 2035. PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and SOC 2 frameworks are incorporating quantum readiness requirements. Regulated industries face the earliest compliance pressure.
Cannot be remediated retroactively:
Unlike software vulnerabilities, cryptographic exposure cannot be remediated once decryption occurs. Once data is decrypted, it's permanent. This is what makes left-tail quantum risk fundamentally different from other cyber threats.
Expected Value Calculation
Sources: Global Risk Institute 2024, IBM Cost of a Data Breach 2024. Even at low-probability assumptions, the exposure case can justify immediate cryptographic review.
Generates Compliance Artifacts
QScout public intake provides a verified website snapshot; QScout Silver or Gold can add approved audit-supporting artifacts for cryptographic assessment controls in PCI-DSS 4.0.1, HIPAA, SOC 2, NIST 800-53, and ISO 27001. Governed deliverables can include technical findings, compliance mapping, remediation sequencing, and board-ready risk assessment. Re-validation is available under QScout Pulse or an approved engagement plan.
PCI-DSS 4.0.1
Requirement 11.4 external security assessment
HIPAA
Technical evaluation under 164.308(a)(8)
SOC 2 Type II
Security testing with methodology documentation
ISO 27001:2022
A.12.6.1 technical vulnerability management
CMMC 2.0
Level 2+ security assessment requirement
FedRAMP Rev 5
FedRAMP-scoped assessment support available
NIST CSF 2.0
PR.DS controls for cryptographic testing
ITAR
Export control cryptographic assessment under 22 CFR 120-130
SOX
Section 404 IT general controls testing
GDPR
Article 32 technical measures evaluation
SWIFT CSP v2026
CSP 2.1/2.3 security assessment
CNSA 2.0
PQC algorithm readiness testing
Compliance Deliverable Package
Executive summary with CVSS scores
Methodology statement (PTES + OWASP)
Scope and authorization record
Evidence package with screenshots
Request/response logs
Signed attestation letter
Remediation verification report
PQC migration recommendations
Adversarial Model Validation
Traditional scanners report findings. QScout can apply adversarial review workflows to confidence-weighted assessments when that workflow is enabled.
Red Agent
Prosecutes. Proves findings are worse than assessed. Finds exploitation chains, adjacent vulnerabilities, data sensitivity factors that increase severity.
Blue Agent
Defends. Proves findings are overblown. Checks compensating controls, limited exploitability, low-value targets.
Arbiter
Synthesizes. Weighs both arguments. Produces confidence-weighted assessment. Critical findings are reviewed through opposing validation paths where that workflow is enabled.
Evidence sources and outcomes
Nine Sources. One Synthesis.
Traditional tools query sources individually. QScout synthesizes them with quantum overlay, adversary relevance, and business context.
Temporal Correlation
Track configuration changes over time, not just current state
Cross-Source Deduplication
Same finding from three sources equals higher confidence
Quantum Overlay
Every finding gets a quantum exposure timestamp
Adversary Relevance
This matters to China. This doesn't matter to ransomware gangs
Business Context
Industry-specific compliance implications surface automatically
Assessment Results
Representative assessment patterns from QScout and QStrike scopes. Public examples are fictionalized composites; buyer-specific proof is reviewed under NDA.
Request Reference Call (NDA Available)Financial Services Composite
Scoped
cryptographic exposure inventory
2029
Quantum Exposure Window (estimated)
Sequenced
PQR advisory path via QSolve
Defense Composite
Reviewed
high-severity findings before delivery
Mapped
harvest-now-decrypt-later exposure signals
Documented
compliance evidence for buyer review
Healthcare Composite
50 yr
data sensitivity window (patient records)
TLS
configuration evidence reviewed by scope
Board-ready
risk narrative and migration sequencing
Evidence-reviewed
high-severity findings before buyer delivery
On-time
delivery tracked against committed assessment timelines
Re-validated
high-severity findings reviewed before delivery
8
Days to board-ready deliverables
Buyer questions and scope comparison
What Skeptical Buyers Ask
Direct answers to the questions enterprise security leaders, procurement officers, and technical evaluators ask before engaging.
Have a question not answered here?
Contact our team for specific requirementsSubject Matter Network
Intelligence-grade discipline applied to enterprise cryptography. References available under NDA.
“I spent my career in environments where encryption failure means mission failure.”
“Every other tool tells you what's broken today. QScout tells you what breaks next, how severe the exposure could be, and where to spend your budget first.”
“What stands out across these environments isn't a lack of encryption, but a lack of prioritization. Quantifying that difference is what turns quantum readiness from a theoretical concern into an actionable program.”
“The question isn't whether quantum disruption will reshape cybersecurity. It's whether leadership teams have a plan in place before that moment arrives.”
“Forty years in semiconductors taught me that vulnerabilities hide where people stop looking.”
Subject Matter Experts & Leadership
The Full Stack
QScout vs QStrike vs QSolve
QScout
Start here for external cryptographic discovery and board-ready risk framing.
- Purpose
- First-step risk measurement
- Engagement model
- Fast scan + deeper tiers
- Entry path
- QScout approved-scope snapshot
- Provider-aligned validation
- Not included
- CBOM delivery
- Guided tiers
- Board Number metric
- Included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Not included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Not included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
QStrike
Use this for operator-led forward-threat validation and exploit evidence.
- Purpose
- Forward-threat validation
- Engagement model
- 90-120 day engagement
- Entry path
- Scope review
- Provider-aligned validation
- Included
- CBOM delivery
- Scoped artifacts
- Board Number metric
- Included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Not included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
QSolve
Use this when you need governed migration sequencing, stakeholder coordination, and execution discipline.
- Purpose
- Migration governance
- Engagement model
- Governed program execution
- Entry path
- Program design
- Provider-aligned validation
- Not included
- CBOM delivery
- Uses prior outputs
- Board Number metric
- Not included
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
- Not included
- PQC migration roadmap
- Included
- Federal compliance docs
- Included
| Capability | QScout | QStrike | QSolve |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose | First-step risk measurement | Forward-threat validation | Migration governance |
| Engagement model | Fast scan + deeper tiers | 90-120 day engagement | Governed program execution |
| Entry path | QScout approved-scope snapshot | Scope review | Program design |
| Provider-aligned validation | Not included | Included | Not included |
| CBOM delivery | Guided tiers | Scoped artifacts | Uses prior outputs |
| Board Number metric | Included | Included | Not included |
| Exploit proof-of-concepts | Not included | Included | Not included |
| PQC migration roadmap | Not included | Not included | Included |
| Federal compliance docs | Included | Included | Included |
Most organizations start with QScout, then move to QStrike when the measured evidence warrants provider-aligned validation, and use QSolve when migration sequencing and execution need formal governance. Enterprise customers may bundle all three. Explore our full solutions catalog.
QStrike
Contact
Rehearsal under adversarial assumptions. Stress test your infrastructure against quantum attack scenarios using provider-aligned validation workflows and governed evidence review, not just theoretical models. This is not "automated magic": it's workflow orchestration plus analyst-driven validation.
- RSA, ECC, AES vulnerability testing
- Six commercial execution platforms across four modalities
- Published-benchmark calibration kept outside the execution set
- Exploit proof-of-concepts
QSolve
Governance & Execution
QSolve turns measured exposure and validated risk into governed migration execution. It keeps vendors, internal teams, compliance owners, and leadership working from the same prioritized sequence on the path to post-quantum readiness by 2029.
- Migration sequence governance
- Cross-team execution coordination
- NSM-10 and EO 14028 & CISA PQC audit-supporting documentation
- Board-level risk communication
Fits Your Existing Stack
QScout integrates with your security tools. Findings flow into existing workflows. No rip-and-replace.
SIEM / SOAR
Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Palo Alto XSOAR, IBM QRadar
EDR / XDR
CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Microsoft Defender
Cloud Security
AWS Security Hub, Azure Defender, GCP Security Command
Identity
Okta, Azure AD, CyberArk, HashiCorp Vault
Network
Palo Alto NGFW, Cisco Umbrella, Cloudflare, Zscaler
Vulnerability Mgmt
Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 InsightVM
Ticketing
ServiceNow, Jira, PagerDuty
Communication
Slack, Microsoft Teams, Email, Webhooks
QScout vs. Alternatives
Traditional Pen Test
Contact Us
- 2-6 week engagement
- No quantum analysis
- No adversary modeling
- Point-in-time only
- Manual report, no synthesis
- No guarantee
QScout
Contact Us
- Rapid scoped deliverables
- Dedicated quantum-risk and PQC analysis
- Adversary-informed risk modeling
- Continuous monitoring options
- Evidence-backed findings and executive reporting
- Compliance mapping support
Doing Nothing
Unmeasured today
- $4.88M average breach cost (IBM/Ponemon 2024)
- Undocumented tail risk to board
- Compliance gap growing
- Cryptographic Debt expanding daily
- Insurance exclusion risk
- Irreversible if wrong
What Happens When You Reach Out
15-minute scoping call
We confirm your domain scope, data sensitivity windows, and compliance requirements. No commitment. No sales pitch. Technical conversation only.
Authorization and NDA
Standard security assessment authorization. Mutual NDA. You define the scope boundaries. Assessment does not begin until you sign.
Assessment runs
Designed to minimize operational disruption. Passive reconnaissance and analysis by default. No active exploitation unless explicitly authorized.
Deliverables in your inbox
Executive summary (2 pages, board-ready). Technical findings (20-50 pages). Adversary timeline visualization. Remediation roadmap. PQC migration guide.
Low-friction start. The scoping call sets fit, boundaries, and delivery shape before any engagement begins. If the lane is wrong, we will say so quickly.
Objections We Hear. Answers We Give.
"Quantum threats are 10+ years away. Why spend money now?"
We don't claim quantum break is imminent. We highlight left-tail risk: a 5-34% probability (32 experts, Global Risk Institute, December 2024 — globalriskinstitute.org/publication/2024-quantum-threat-timeline-report/) of an event that is catastrophic, irreversible, and cannot be remediated retroactively. You buy fire insurance at lower probability thresholds. The question isn't timing — it's whether a 5% chance of permanent data exposure exceeds your risk appetite.
"We already have classical security testing. Why add this?"
Your security tester doesn't model quantum timelines. They tell you if your TLS is configured correctly today. QScout tells you when that correctly-configured TLS becomes breakable, by which adversary, and what data is exposed in the window. It's additive intelligence, not duplicate testing. It addresses cryptographic-specific compliance controls that standard security assessments don't cover.
"How do I know your probability models are credible?"
We don't generate our own predictions. We use probability distributions from 32 quantum computing experts surveyed by the Global Risk Institute (December 2024), cross-referenced with NIST and NSA posture. Our public leadership roster includes Lt. Gen. Weatherington (USAF, ret.) and Dr. David Mussington (former CISA). We model tail risk — we don't claim certainty.
"What if you find nothing?"
In every assessment to date, we have identified quantum-vulnerable configurations. Our analysis of 528 public enterprise endpoints (Qtonic Quantum Research, February 2026) found zero with PQC deployed. But even a clean bill of health has value: documented proof your tail risk is mitigated satisfies compliance requirements, reduces insurance premiums, and gives your board a defensible risk position. You're paying for the assessment, not the findings.
"Can this actually integrate with our CrowdStrike / Splunk / ServiceNow stack?"
Yes. Findings export as SARIF, JSON, and PDF. We integrate directly with Splunk, Sentinel, CrowdStrike Falcon, ServiceNow, Jira, PagerDuty, Slack, and Teams. API webhooks for custom workflows. No manual report shuffling.
"The $2M challenge — how does it work?"
Qualifying QStrike engagements can opt into the published $2,000,000 Challenge terms. Independent review, signed engagement terms, and annual program-cap conditions apply. Learn more at /qstrike.
15 Minutes to Know If This Fits
Scoping call. No commitment. We'll tell you if QScout is the right tool for your risk profile—or if it isn't.
Custom scoping. Fast delivery. Board-ready deliverables.
Faster evidence than unmanaged cryptographic drift
Reference benchmark: IBM/Ponemon 2024 average breach cost. We use this as context, not as a guaranteed ROI claim.
Provider Assurance Boundary
Some infrastructure assurance belongs to the underlying provider. It supports buyer diligence, but it is not a Qtonic Quantum-held certification or attestation.