Turn the questionnaire and documents already in the submission into an underwriting verdict, with OT evidence you can check. The applicant is asked nothing.
Your first result is a DeRISK™ UWA short report on one submission, with the evidence behind it. The underwriter makes the call.
The price shows how it was built, for referral and audit.
The questionnaire says one thing. The documents behind it may say another. Someone has to read both.
Augment your underwriting team with OT cyber specialist capability — without hiring one
DeRISK reads the questionnaire and the companion documents together, as one case. It is pre-trained on the main insurer and broker questionnaire formats, so you send what you already receive. The applicant is asked nothing.
Broker form · Q 4.2
Is your OT network segmented from corporate IT?“Yes, mostly. Plant floor sits on its own VLAN, a couple of jump hosts are shared.”
Standardized record
Example submission. One broker-form answer on OT segmentation becomes a standardised record.
Each OT control is scored against the evidence in the file. IT and OT confidence are shown apart, so you see how much of the OT picture is backed by documents.
Stated and verified controls, IT and OT, kept apart.
Example submission. IT and OT confidence are scored separately, control by control.
You get a verdict with conditions precedent written in market terms. An underwriter reviews every output, and nothing binds without a person.
| Condition | When | Evidence | If unmet |
|---|---|---|---|
| MFA on all remote access, including vendors | Before binding | Configuration record or attestation | Bound with a remote-access exclusion |
| Offline, tested backups | Before binding | Latest restore test | Quote withdrawn |
| OT asset inventory | Subjectivity: within 90 days of binding | Inventory document | OT losses excluded from day 91 |
Conditions before binding, kept apart from post-bind subjectivities, each with its evidence and its consequence.
Example submission. Each condition shows when it applies and what evidence closes it.
The verdict, the loss it implies and the evidence behind it, shown here from the Underwriter sample report.
Scale 0 to 10, where 10 is best. Every view uses the same direction.
The premium is 1.4 times expected annual loss. Also VaR and the AEP curve.
Every finding traces to the question or document behind it, with an attribution statement and a human review.
The underwriter decides. Nothing binds without a person.
A full audit trail and attribution statement.
The Enterprise tier substitutes your actuarial model entirely.
Each runs in isolation, nothing trains the models, and client data is flushed after the run.
Standard is free: one submission and a short report. Professional is recommended, with multiple documents, committee-ready reports and saved analyses.
Standard is free and assesses one submission with a short report. Professional adds multiple documents, committee-ready reports and saved analyses.
The applicant is asked nothing. An underwriter makes every call.