Underwriting
5 articles.
Attestation vs evidence: why "yes we patch" isn't underwriting data
Applicants answer questionnaires hopefully. Attackers don't read the PDF. Here's how to map cyber-insurance questions to outside-in evidence — and why verified exposure beats another checkbox.
Kill the questionnaire — what underwriters actually need instead
The cyber insurance questionnaire was always a proxy for one question: can an attacker get in? Here's what replaces the form when you can prove outside-in exposure instead of asking applicants to attest to it.
Why verified findings are the only questionnaire replacement that sticks
If what replaces the cyber questionnaire cries wolf — immaterial perimeter noise, unverified estimates — underwriters go back to the form. Verification is how Kill the Questionnaire earns trust.
From application to bind: less friction, better signal
Kill the Questionnaire as a process — what gets flagged before bind, what applicants stop typing, and how brokers and carriers move faster without swallowing unverified ratings noise.
What a broker should ask for beyond the form
A practical checklist for brokers: continuous external proof, verified findings, and a trendable breach-risk view — questions that separate claim-relevant signal from ratings noise and questionnaire hope.