Your environment, resolved.
Every tool holds a fragment. Live Security Context continuously resolves them into one current understanding of your assets, identities, access, ownership, and change.
Every tool can be right. The picture can still be wrong.
Each tool accurately reports its own domain. None can see whether those facts combine into a route to something that matters.
Five accurate findings. No shared understanding.
One meaningful exposure path. Not five disconnected findings.
Same CVE. Different environment. Different decision.
A global score is the same everywhere, which makes it useless exactly where you need it. Only your environment knows which exposures reach something worth reaching.
You don't build this. It is derived from what you already run.
Your connectors are the input. There is no taxonomy to design, no inventory project, and nothing for your team to maintain. See what Unizo connects to.
Entities and relationships are resolved from your sources.
The model updates as your environment changes.
Your tools stay the source of every fact.
Live Security Context exists before the question.
An agent shouldn't be discovering your environment while it's deciding what to do.
Prompt-time retrieval can gather facts. It cannot recover relationships that were never modeled, state that was never preserved, or context that was never connected. Live Security Context is already built, current, and carrying its evidence before the decision starts.
The attacker did their homework in advance. So did you.
Risk changes when the environment changes.
A closed exposure can quietly reopen after a redeploy or a permission change. Live Security Context updates continuously and keeps the history, so you can see whether the path still exists at every point in time.
The model doesn't just remember the finding. It remembers whether the path still exists.
One live model grounds every security decision.
Every step reasons over this one model, which is why every conclusion traces back to your environment instead of a generic score.
Your agents can reason over it too.
Live Security Context is available to your own AI tools through MCP, so the environment Unizo reasons over is the same one your agents can ask.
Ask what exists, what it can reach, and who owns it, from the agentic tools your teams already use.
Common questions
What data does Unizo read?
Metadata about your environment: assets and their configuration, identities and access, ownership, findings and change. Not the contents of your databases, files or code. See Trust.
Do we have to build or maintain the model?
No. It is resolved from the tools you already run, with nothing to model and nothing to curate. Your tools stay the source of every fact.
What happens when two sources disagree?
Every fact keeps the source it came from, so a conclusion can be traced back to which tool reported what, rather than resting on one merged answer.
What about parts of the environment you have less coverage of?
Conclusions rest on the evidence behind them. Where a fact is not available, it is not asserted, and you can see what a conclusion does and does not rest on.
Can our own AI tools use it?
Yes. Live Security Context is available through MCP, so your agents can reason over the same model Unizo does.
How current is the model?
It updates as your environment changes, and it keeps the history, so you can see whether a path still exists at any point in time.