How do your agents decide a suspected issue is a validated vulnerability, and what measured false-positive/false-negative rates can you share?
How is customer code and data isolated and encrypted throughout reconnaissance, exploitation, and patch generation (e.g., single-tenant VPC, data-retention policy)?
Do the agents ever apply patches automatically, or is human review required—and how does the workflow integrate with CI/CD to prevent regressions?
I'm actually pretty interested in what you're building. Sure, Vanguard and Fidelity are well-established giants, but they've barely moved beyond standard ETFs for decades. Having the option to tweak weightings at a more granular level and do daily tax-loss harvesting at scale seems like a genuine step forward.
I also like that you're transparent about how you might eventually introduce additional revenue streams like margin lending or maybe even PFOF. Knowing that upfront is better than a sudden terms-of-service surprise down the road. Still, I'd hope you'll consider giving users some say over how their shares are handled — like opting out of lending — so your incentives stay aligned over the long run.
Congrats on hitting $10M AUM. I'm rooting for more low-fee alternatives that keep the user in the loop!
How do your agents decide a suspected issue is a validated vulnerability, and what measured false-positive/false-negative rates can you share?
How is customer code and data isolated and encrypted throughout reconnaissance, exploitation, and patch generation (e.g., single-tenant VPC, data-retention policy)?
Do the agents ever apply patches automatically, or is human review required—and how does the workflow integrate with CI/CD to prevent regressions?
Ty!