Small businessgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsNot ranked
1 category · Named, not rankedCISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities
1Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
1 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities was named 1 time in Threat intel, where MISP led with 12%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market73 of 119
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In threat intel · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 0% | 73 of 119 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by MISP at 12% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Threat intel · by segment
Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 70 of 111, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intel | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 73 of 119, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative1 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
No positive label carried a quote.
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities, over the 1 answer that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities, over the 1 answer that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 1 of the 1 answers that named CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
analyticsinsight.net1
aviatrix.ai1
aws.amazon.com1
capterra.com1
cipherssecurity.com1
comparisec.com1
consilien.com1
costbench.com1
devopsschool.com1
expertinsights.com1
Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cisa.gov is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities takes 0% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cisa.gov is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities takes 0% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “threat intelligence platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “threat intelligence platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Organic visits to its site
- about 1,801,370 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 236,251 · 8,960 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 83,428
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 73 of 119 in threat intel
Segment leader
12%
MISP
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 1 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 1 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on cisa.gov
24,582
subdomains included
Content
16,504
counted in the table below
Documentation
2
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News or press | 11,401 | 104 | 2026-09-27 | SD-WAN, MFA | |
| Template or tool | 2,287 | 1 | 2026-09-24 | ||
| Blog | 2,053 | 55 | 2026-09-24 | MFA, SIEM | |
| Conference or event | 511 | 44 | 2026-10-08 | Logs, SCA | |
| Glossary or explainer | 116 | 57 | 2026-09-17 | SIEM | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 68 | 12 | 2026-10-08 | ||
| Report or ebook | 33 | 1 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Case study | 26 | 2 | 2026-09-01 | MFA | |
| Comparison | 8 | 1 | 2026-07-27 | ||
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-10-08Active shooter preparedness webinar webinar or virtual event
- 2026-10-08Personal security considerations workshop conference or event
- 2026-10-08Active shooter preparedness webinar training 9 webinar or virtual event
- 2026-09-27Cybersecurity advisories news or press
- 2026-09-24Icsa 26 209 02 news or press
- 2026-09-24Icsa 26 267 01 news or press
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cisa.gov exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Of its titles that name a category, most name SD-WAN (12); 0 name the category the models place it in. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities; a claim can dispute any of them.
CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) 1
Follow CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.