Comparison · Digital risk platforms

ShadowMap vs CloudSEK

CloudSEK is first to market on exposed AI infrastructure and ShadowMap has no equivalent to it. That concession comes first because the rest of this page is only worth your time if it is honest about the parts we lose.

Request an exposure snapshot How to evaluate this

What they actually are

CloudSEK defined attack-path vocabulary in this market

“Predictive Attack Graph Platform for the AI Era”

CloudSEK’s own positioning line, quoted

A digital-risk platform built around predictive attack-path analysis, with five or more products covering external monitoring, mobile and API exposure, supply chain, and — newly — exposed AI infrastructure. The vocabulary is theirs and we are not going to contest it; ShadowMap describes what it does as one correlated exposure model, which is a different claim rather than a competing name for the same one.

They are well funded, growing, and strong in India and APAC — which is our own home market, so we meet them often and we meet them on their ground as much as ours.

Conceded

Where CloudSEK is ahead of us

The last of these is the one we cannot answer at all, which is why it is the one this page opened with.

No hedging

Four places CloudSEK is the better product

Mobile and API exposure: BeVigil goes deeper on mobile and API surface than we do. Our application inventory sits inside attack-surface discovery; it is not an application-testing product and it is not pretending to be one.
Social-media data leaks: A standing concession in their direction. Their social-media data-leak coverage is better than ours.
Market position: Well funded, growing, with a strong India and APAC presence — the same market we are strongest in, which means their references are as reachable as ours.
Exposed AI infrastructure: AIVigil is genuinely first to market: exposed AI infrastructure, MCP servers, leaked AI credentials, vector databases, shadow AI. ShadowMap has no answer to it. If that is your primary requirement, buy theirs — claiming otherwise is a claim that fails on the first demo.

Where the overlap ends

Capability by capability

The first two rows go to CloudSEK. The last three are the ones to take into a demo.

ShadowMap and CloudSEK, capability by capability
Capability	CloudSEK	ShadowMap
Exposed AI infrastructure	AIVigil — MCP servers, leaked AI credentials, vector databases, shadow AI. First to market.	No equivalent. We do not cover this and we will not claim to.
Published on CloudSEK’s own product pages. Verified August 2026.
Mobile and API exposure	BeVigil — depth we do not match.	Web and mobile application inventory inside attack-surface discovery, not an application-testing product.
BeVigil is published as a named product on their site. August 2026.
What the correlation terminates in	Predictive attack-path analysis across the product line.	One correlated exposure model that ends in a tested finding rather than a predicted path.
Both descriptions are the vendors’ own words. The difference is whether the output is a prediction or a result — ask each vendor to show you one. August 2026.
Offensive validation	No offensive-validation equivalent anywhere in the expanded product line.	Continuous Automated Red-Teaming tests exposure where it is safe and authorised, and says so explicitly where it did not.
Checkable against CloudSEK’s published product line, which names every SKU. August 2026.
Licensing	Five or more product names to buy, learn and renew.	One licence, one price, one renewal conversation.
CloudSEK publishes its product names on its own site; the count is theirs. August 2026.

ShadowMap and CloudSEK, capability by capability

Exposed AI infrastructure

CloudSEK: AIVigil — MCP servers, leaked AI credentials, vector databases, shadow AI. First to market.
ShadowMap: No equivalent. We do not cover this and we will not claim to.

Published on CloudSEK’s own product pages. Verified August 2026.

Mobile and API exposure

CloudSEK: BeVigil — depth we do not match.
ShadowMap: Web and mobile application inventory inside attack-surface discovery, not an application-testing product.

BeVigil is published as a named product on their site. August 2026.

What the correlation terminates in

CloudSEK: Predictive attack-path analysis across the product line.
ShadowMap: One correlated exposure model that ends in a tested finding rather than a predicted path.

Both descriptions are the vendors’ own words. The difference is whether the output is a prediction or a result — ask each vendor to show you one. August 2026.

Offensive validation

CloudSEK: No offensive-validation equivalent anywhere in the expanded product line.
ShadowMap: Continuous Automated Red-Teaming tests exposure where it is safe and authorised, and says so explicitly where it did not.

Checkable against CloudSEK’s published product line, which names every SKU. August 2026.

Licensing

CloudSEK: Five or more product names to buy, learn and renew.
ShadowMap: One licence, one price, one renewal conversation.

CloudSEK publishes its product names on its own site; the count is theirs. August 2026.

The genuine version of this question

When to choose CloudSEK over ShadowMap

Three of these five point at CloudSEK. If one of them is your requirement, we would rather you knew now than after a proof of concept.

If this is your situation	What it means	Who to buy
Exposed AI infrastructure is the requirement	MCP servers, vector databases, leaked model credentials, shadow AI already running in the estate.	Buy CloudSEK. We have no equivalent, and buying us instead leaves the requirement unmet.
Mobile and API exposure depth	A large published mobile app estate, or an API surface that is the main risk.	Buy CloudSEK. BeVigil goes deeper here than we do.
Social-media data leaks are the main exposure	Leaked material surfacing on social platforms rather than in code or on the dark web.	Buy CloudSEK. Their coverage is better than ours and we concede it in both directions.
Broad external exposure, either way	Comparable breadth on both sides. The decision turns on whether you value validation and removal.	Genuinely even. Run both demos against the same apex domain and compare what comes back.
A finding has to be tested before anyone acts on it	The queue is already full of predicted risk and nobody has time to work out which entries are real.	ShadowMap. Where it is safe and authorised the exposure is probed, and the finding carries what was and was not tested.

Key

CloudSEK is the better purchase
Genuinely even
ShadowMap

Sourcing

How this comparison was made

What this page is sourced from As of August 2026

Every claim about CloudSEK is checkable on their own published product pages, which name each SKU.
Every figure on this page is either the vendor’s own published number or a Vendr transaction median. No ShadowMap figure appears anywhere — not a record count, not a provider count, not an accuracy figure, which we do not publish at all by policy.
Where the vendor is stronger, it is stated in their column and not softened. A comparison that concedes nothing does not get read.

Deliberately excluded

We do not contest attack-path or attack-graph vocabulary. CloudSEK owns those terms in this market and a page that fought for them would be fighting the wrong argument.
AIVigil is not compared against anything on our side, because there is nothing on our side to compare it to.
CloudSEK publishes no pricing anywhere. Nothing on this page estimates it.

Where to go next

The pages that answer the CloudSEK gaps directly

What the alternative stack costs Published list prices and Vendr transaction medians for assembling comparable coverage from point tools. Vendors who publish nothing are excluded from the arithmetic rather than estimated. Continuous Automated Red-Teaming The one capability with no equivalent in CloudSEK’s expanded line — what gets tested, what does not, and how a finding carries its own scope. Attack Surface Management Where the two products overlap most, including origin-behind-WAF discovery — the separator worth putting to both vendors in a demo.

Questions buyers actually ask

Before you shortlist CloudSEK

Is ShadowMap a CloudSEK alternative?

For broad external exposure, yes — the breadth is comparable and the decision turns on whether you value validation and removal. It is not an alternative for exposed AI infrastructure: AIVigil is first to market and we have no equivalent. It is also not an alternative for mobile and API depth, where BeVigil is stronger, or for social-media data leaks, where their coverage is better than ours.

Does ShadowMap do attack-path analysis?

No, and we would not describe what we do in those terms. CloudSEK built the category around predicting how an attacker could move; ShadowMap runs one correlated exposure model and, where it is safe and authorised, tests the individual exposure rather than predicting the route. Those are different products answering different questions, and a buyer who wants a predicted path should buy the vendor that sells one.

We already run CloudSEK. What would ShadowMap add?

A result rather than a prediction on the exposures you already know about, and a removal at the end of the impersonation cases — unlimited, subject to fair use. The honest test is to look at your last month of CloudSEK findings and ask how many were closed because someone confirmed the exposure could not actually be used. If that number is low, that is the gap we fill.

See what a tested finding looks like next to a predicted one

One apex domain, two business days, a written snapshot. Run it against the same estate CloudSEK is already watching.

Request an exposure snapshot How to evaluate this