COMPARE / VS OX SECURITY
From posture lists to proven attack paths.
ASPM platforms correlate and prioritize findings across the software supply chain. 0day Factory takes the next step: it investigates whether a prioritized weakness forms a real, exploitable path in your environment and proves it.
Where ASPM fits — and where 0day Factory is different.
ASPM is strong at aggregating, de-duplicating and prioritizing findings across tools and the SDLC. Its constraint is that prioritization is still inference about risk, not proof of exploitability.
This comparison describes the general, publicly understood approach of the category. It is not a claim about any specific vendor's current capabilities — verify those directly with the vendor. 0day Factory does not publish competitor benchmarks it has not independently run.
Compare on what actually matters.
Evaluate any offensive-security tool on these dimensions. The right-hand column describes the general category approach, not a specific vendor's current product.
| Dimension | 0day Factory | ASPM (posture management) |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility | Reasons across software, infra, identity, controls, org policy and runtime together. | Broad across the software supply chain and tools. |
| Black-box execution | Tests the attacker-reachable surface within approved scope. | Not an execution/attack tool by design. |
| White-box context | Uses approved source, architecture and prior findings as fuel. | Strong on code/pipeline posture. |
| Infrastructure | Cloud, hosts, networks and exposed services in the model. | Covered as posture signals. |
| Identity | Users, service identities, roles, tokens and tenant boundaries. | Covered as posture signals. |
| Security controls | Tests whether WAF/IAM/network/endpoint controls actually stopped the path. | Inventory and policy, not live validation. |
| Org-policy context | Scope, exceptions, SDLC rules and threat models inform the investigation. | Policy-as-code and prioritization rules. |
| Exploit proof | Every finding carries path, safe validation and evidence. | Prioritization and reachability inference, not exploit proof. |
| Re-test | Re-runs the original hypothesis to prove the fix held. | Tracks finding status; does not re-exploit. |
| Customer-controlled execution | Workers run near approved targets under your authorization and audit. | No offensive execution. |
Questions, answered.
Should I replace ASPM with 0day Factory?
Often they are complementary. The useful question is which tool produces defensible exploit proof in your environment, with context, re-test and customer-controlled execution. Evaluate both on the dimensions above and verify each vendor's current capabilities directly.
Compare on exploit proof, not severity scores.
Request access and see a de-identified investigation end to end: hypothesis, path, safe validation, evidence and re-test.