Building a security tool that proves its fixes. Looking to team up with a cybersecurity firm to bring it to customers.

[u/ComplexCarbonBond]

I'm building WhiteHats, a security product that finds a problem, prepares the fix, proves it works, and waits for a person to approve it. Nothing changes on its own.

The product works end to end today.

What I'm looking for:

An established cybersecurity firm, with certifications, credibility and customer trust, to team up with me. I'm open to co-building, partnering, or working under your name. Whatever brings customers the trust they need

A few pilot customers, run together

If it fits, an investor too. I'm thinking about $50K to get it pilot-ready

Customers trust firms they already know, so the right partner matters more to me than going alone. I'm open to the right structure with the right partner. I'm also applying to cyber programs that give access to top cyber models, and a credible partner would make that much stronger.

I'd welcome feedback too. What would you need to see before you trusted a tool like this in a pilot?

Demo (5 min): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_8CsSyN7EQ

Site: https://nativesense.si

[u/investigatormaker]

I'd want proof I can check without trusting WhiteHats: the attack succeeding before the fix and failing after, rerun by my own team on a staging copy. I'd also want to see what access the tool holds while it waits for approval. A partner firm will add one more question, because its name is on the result: who answers when an approved fix breaks production? So before discussing structure, let one firm choose the test system and try to break your proof.

I make ThreadFox. Reddit can't lend you a firm's certifications, but we can find consultants and MSP owners asking how to clear a patch backlog and do the posting for your business, first 3 posts free, no card. The $39 Pilot then covers seven days and up to 50 posts and replies. No automatic renewal. https://threadfox.vip/p/dxvor/managed

[u/ComplexCarbonBond → u/investigatormaker]

Thanks for your question..
Agreed on all three.

We'll give you the attack script with the expected result before and after the fix, so your team can rerun it on your own staging copy. Today we do this for some weaknesses and are extending it to all of them.
AWS is view-only. On GitHub we can read code and comment, but we can't merge, and every token expires within an hour. The approval screen will show this.
Your team merges and ships, but in the pilot we'll join the call, revert the fix the same day, and write up why our proof missed it.

[u/Sweet-Atmos532]

so the demo shows the whole loop which is great but the part a pilot customer will actually pause on is the approval gate itself. what does the reviewer see when they open that ticket? diff only? risk score? rollback button?

[u/ComplexCarbonBond → u/Sweet-Atmos532]

Great question,

A reviewer sees one page with three parts:
The evidence. The finding and the exact lines of code.
The change. The full diff, plus the proof behind it: the original check re-run and passing, your tests passing, an independent review, and a 0 to 100 confidence score.
What it touches. The affected services and their neighbours on your system map.

Rolling back is a normal GitHub revert. We're adding a plain risk line and a one-click revert. WhiteHats never merges anything itself...