OTTRIA in market comparison
You already have a scanner? Good. You have a support contract for your most important projects? Even better. The question is: is that enough?
The comparison matrix #
| Dimension | SCA tools | Catalogue ELS | Enterprise support | OTTRIA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Scans your SBOM | Fixed project catalogue | Selected projects | Entire SBOM |
| Finds problems | Only registered CVEs | No | Partially | Yes, incl. silent fixes |
| Fixes problems | No | Yes, catalogue only | Yes, for selection | Yes, incl. abandoned projects |
| Upstream work | No | No | Rarely | Yes, as steward |
| Compliance documentation | Reports | No | No | Fully audit-ready |
| Abandonment protection | No | Partially | No | Yes |
| Deletion protection | No | No | No | Yes |
| Licence change protection | No | No | No | Yes |
| Operationally threatening bugs | No | No | Partially | Yes (DORA requirement) |
| Provider location | Mostly USA | Mostly USA | Occasionally EU | Germany |
What the matrix means #
SCA tools: visibility without action #
SCA scanners are Layer 1: they make visible what is in your stack and which registered vulnerabilities exist. That is necessary and valuable. But a scanner does not fix a vulnerability, does not create a patch, and does not document a measure for your auditor. And it only finds what is registered in a CVE database — not the four to eleven silent fixes per CVE.
Catalogue providers: help for a fraction #
Extended lifecycle support works from a fixed catalogue. If your critical dependency is listed there, you receive backports and patches. The reality: your SBOM contains hundreds of projects, the catalogue covers dozens. The gap is substantial.
Enterprise support: punctual, not comprehensive #
Commercial support serves popular technologies with high demand. It reliably solves problems in its area. But it does not cover your entire supply chain, does not deliver compliance documentation, and does not work on abandoned projects.
OTTRIA: Layer 2 and 3 #
OTTRIA starts where scanners and support contracts end. We monitor your entire SBOM, actively fix vulnerabilities — including in projects without a maintainer — and deliver the audit-ready documentation that your supervisory authority expects.
Complementary, not competing #
OTTRIA does not replace any of these tools. We complement them.
If you already use a scanner, we use its results as one of several sources. If you already have support contracts, we focus on the projects that are not covered. If you already have an internal team, we relieve it of the tasks that do not scale internally: the work on hundreds of heterogeneous projects in dozens of programming languages.
The laws do not require individual tools. They require demonstrable due diligence across your entire software supply chain. For that, you need Layer 1, Layer 2, and Layer 3 together.
The decisive question #
Which of the following statements can you answer with yes today?
- We know for every component in our SBOM whether the maintainer is still active.
- We can create and deploy patches ourselves for abandoned projects.
- We detect silently fixed vulnerabilities that have no CVE number.
- We have a documented exit strategy for every critical dependency.
- We can present complete remediation protocols for every security incident to our auditor.
Every question you answer with no is an open flank. OTTRIA closes these flanks.