Your Vendor Was Breached. Now You Need to Investigate Your Side of the Connection.

The provider can explain what it found in its environment. Your team still has to review the access that existed on your side, the activity recorded by your tools, and any exposure that needs follow-up. CrunchAtlas helps with that investigation.

A breached vendor may already have a trusted path into your university.

Universities connect vendors to identity, SaaS, APIs, administrative systems, research, and campus services. When one of those providers is compromised, the problem isn't just vendor risk anymore. It's an internal investigation.

SOURCE →
01

Trusted identity

SSO, service accounts, OAuth tokens, delegated roles, and support credentials can give a provider legitimate access inside the university.

02

Connected applications

SIS, ERP, LMS, finance, research, and collaboration platforms can exchange data through APIs, connectors, and trusted applications.

03

Decentralized ownership

Colleges, labs, research groups, and administrative units may hold separate credentials, integrations, and vendor relationships outside central IT.

04

Operational pressure

Keeping a connection offline can disrupt teaching, registration, payroll, research, or campus services, which puts pressure on the team to restore quickly.

The more distributed the relationship, the more work it takes to piece together what your own environment recorded.

The evidence you need may already be spread across the stack.

Identity, endpoint, network, application, and alert data can each hold part of the picture. The challenge is bringing the relevant evidence into one investigation without rebuilding the case by hand across separate tools.

SOURCE →
01

Find the relevant access

Identify the accounts, tokens, API keys, admin roles, trusted applications, and support paths tied to the affected provider.

02

Pull the evidence together

Bring identity, endpoint, network, SIEM, and application evidence into the same investigation instead of reviewing each source in isolation.

03

Trace related activity

Follow related activity across the available evidence to understand which systems, accounts, or connections need closer review.

04

Bound the investigation

Separate confirmed findings from possible exposure and unanswered questions so the team can focus the next step.

05

Retest the known path

After credentials, access, or segmentation change, retest an approved path to see whether that same tested path remains reproducible.

06

Document the findings

Carry the findings, remaining uncertainty, remediation, and approval decision into an incident record for review.

Where CrunchAtlas fits in the university security stack.

Does CrunchAtlas replace the university's SIEM, EDR, IAM, or TPRM program?

No. CrunchAtlas works alongside the existing stack and response process. Its role is to help connect the evidence those systems produce into investigation, threat hunting, validation, and reporting workflows.

What does CrunchAtlas add during a third-party incident?

It helps the team correlate related activity, examine host and network evidence, look beyond the original indicator, retest approved paths, and carry findings into a reviewable incident record.

Can CrunchAtlas retest an approved path after remediation?

Yes, within an approved test scope. PurpleHaze can retest a known path after access, credential, or segmentation changes. It doesn't test or validate anything inside the vendor's environment.

When a vendor reports an incident, your team still has an investigation to run.

CrunchAtlas helps central IT and security bring available evidence into the same investigation, examine related host and network activity, retest approved paths, and build an incident record for review.

Works alongside the university's existing security data, tools, and response process. Visibility and conclusions depend on the evidence available in the environment.