Agentless GTM threat intel. Evidence you can act on.
We don't install agents, touch your infra, or ask for API keys. We run controlled browser sessions with honey tokens from the public web, map how your GTM tools behave in runtime, and hand your security, legal, and GTM leaders an evidence pack they can move on.
Perimeter hygiene and posture rating
User reviews and marketing claims
Runtime GTM behavior and exploit chains
Replay the GTM Kill Chain Against Your Own Stack
We replay the GTM kill chain in a controlled browser session: plant honey tokens, run exploit flows, and document which vendors are currently exploitable—and exactly how. No agents. No SDK. No credentials. No access to your infrastructure.
The output isn't "10,000 minor issues." It's a focused report on what's exploitable now, with evidence chains you can take to legal, security, or the vendor directly.
We pick 1–3 high-risk flows with you (demo request, checkout / trial, newsletter, "contact sales").
We generate unique emails / phones / identities and run them through those flows under different consent states.
Controlled browser sessions log scripts, cookies, localStorage, and network calls—no agents, no access, no SDK.
We trace where your honey tokens go: which tools touch them, which vendors send them off-site, and who ignores your consent state.
Each tool in the flow is classified by: consent & compliance risk, data exfiltration risk, and "behaves like malware" flags.
Diagrams and tables of every script, pixel, SDK, and endpoint present in the tested journeys.
Evidence of pre-consent tracking, post-reject tracking, consent bypass logic, and any dark patterns discovered.
For each test identity: timestamps, consent state, vendors that touched it, and any out-of-bounds data use.
HARs, header snippets, cookie/storage dumps, and human-readable summaries aligned to regulatory language.
Concrete recommendations: what to block, what to sandbox, and which contracts or DPAs need new language.
No source code.
No database or warehouse access.
No OAuth tokens or admin credentials.
No agents or SDKs in your environment.
If an attacker or shady vendor can see it from the browser, so can we. That's the only vantage point we use.
"Who's Stealing From You?" Evidence Pack
We overlay your GTM vendor list with Blackout's threat intelligence and escalate the vendors where: runtime behavior is actively exploitable, or where docs and DPAs are materially contradicted by observable behavior.
This is not a giant vendor catalog. We don't score every tool on vague criteria. We flag the ones that matter—the ones where there's an exploit path and a consequence.
We normalize your GTM vendor list into categories (analytics, orchestration, identity, enrichment, "dark" vendors, etc.).
We correlate your vendor list with what we've already documented: consent bypasses, cookie theft, attribution stuffing, graph-building.
Each vendor is rated across: data exfiltration risk, consent & regulatory risk, attribution & revenue integrity risk.
We identify vendors that siphon your first-party data into their own graphs, hijack attribution credit, or behave like external data brokers.
Every GTM vendor scored across exfiltration, consent, attribution, and graph risk—with clear "Monitor, Limit, Sandbox, Replace, Terminate" recommendations.
Multi-page dossiers on high-risk vendors with: public claims vs observed behavior, known exploit patterns, implications for legal/compliance.
A board-safe overview explaining: who is using your data as raw material, how your revenue narrative is being distorted, and what it takes to reassert control.
Concrete options: reverse proxies, CSP rules, GTM changes, contract language, or vendor replacements.
> Most teams start with the GTM Stack Pentest, then roll into a Vendor Risk Map once they see how bad the problem really is.
30–45 min
You bring your GTM, security, and legal leads. We map your highest-risk flows and tools.
1–3 weeks
We run the tests, correlate with our threat intel, and build your evidence pack. No agents, no access.
Working session
We walk your team through the findings, answer hard questions, and decide what gets monitored, sandboxed, or killed.