Vailor: the sovereign AI-native GRC alternative to All4Tec

In the nature of the impact. On an information system you reason about data loss and service downtime. On a production line, a scenario that plays out can halt a process, degrade product quality or affect people and the environment. The order of the criteria inverts: availability and integrity come ahead of confidentiality, and functional safety outranks the rest. Severity scales therefore have to be rewritten in business and physical terms, in hours of lost output or human consequences, rather than in IT categories.

They play different roles. EBIOS RM, the method published by the French agency ANSSI, structures the reasoning across five workshops: scope and security baseline, risk origins, strategic scenarios, operational scenarios, and risk treatment. IEC 62443, the standards series for industrial automation and control systems, contributes the split into zones and conduits and a target security level for each zone. In practice EBIOS RM justifies the level you aim for, while IEC 62443 sets out the requirements that meet it. Vailor carries EBIOS RM natively and keeps every trade-off traceable.

Yes, by bringing the tool to the data instead of the reverse. Many industrial sites forbid any data leaving for a cloud. Vailor installs in your own infrastructure, or runs as SaaS with data stored in France. You choose the AI model, including a self-hosted one.

Without active scanning. A standard network sweep can knock an ageing controller offline, and a maintenance window is often negotiated months in advance. The map is therefore built from what already exists: architecture diagrams, maintenance inventories, supplier lists and passive captures. Vailor is the consolidation point: you mirror your organisation, perimeters and assets there, and each site follows the group settings or keeps its own. The inventory becomes a living reference again instead of a spreadsheet frozen on the day the audit ended.

By capitalising on what repeats. Two plants often share the same controller families, the same suppliers and very similar attack scenarios, yet differ in their process and their criticality. The approach that holds is to maintain a common baseline of scenarios and controls, then specialise per site only what is genuinely site-specific. In Vailor, each site or entity inherits the group settings (scales, matrices, risk sources) or keeps its own, fine-grained rights limit everyone to their own scope, and the AI prefills each analysis from the site's documents.

Without starting from scratch. Your existing analyses hold years of field knowledge: severity scales negotiated with the operational teams, scenarios validated in committee, residual risks formally accepted by management. Carrying them over means keeping your scales rather than replacing them, working from your existing files and documents, then re-running one analysis on a pilot site to compare the results. Our team supports that work, and every decision carried over stays traceable for audit.