Many security scores look impressive in a slide deck yet feel arbitrary to the engineers doing the work. If the number can’t explain itself—or worse, if it can be “gamed”—it won’t change behavior. VulneraX takes a different path: a posture score that is trendable, explainable, and resistant to vanity fixes.
What the score measures
Each finding receives a normalized impact based on three signals: severity (Critical→Info), exploitability (how practical it is), and confidence (how certain we are, given evidence). These are combined into an issue weight. The posture score (0–10) aggregates weights across your target, with caps to prevent a flood of low issues from overshadowing one Critical.
Intuition, not just math
Fixing a Critical with strong evidence moves the needle far more than closing ten Low issues. Suppressing a finding without evidence doesn’t boost the score. The incentives align with reality: reduce real risk, not just ticket count.
Why engineers trust it
- Transparent factors: severity, exploitability, confidence—no black boxes.
- Evidence-first: every claim ships with artifacts (headers, DOM snapshots, request/response).
- Noise-aware: deduplication and confidence prevent jitter from minor or duplicate issues.
How to use it day-to-day
- Track trends: watch the 4-week trajectory after sprints and releases.
- Gate changes: set posture thresholds for sensitive services (CI integration forthcoming).
- Prioritize: sort by “impact × confidence” to schedule the next three fixes that matter most.
The posture score isn’t a trophy; it’s a compass. By grounding the number in evidence and clear incentives, VulneraX helps teams make measurable progress: fewer criticals, faster triage, and a security story leadership can understand—without distorting the work that truly reduces risk.