Trust Evaluation Platform

One standard of trust for every application in your stack

Kodepo evaluates application software — open‑source, internal, or third‑party — against five trust criteria and produces a structured report your security team can act on.

You hold vendor software, open-source software, and internal software to three different standards of trust

Vendor software gets a SOC 2 review — but that evaluates the organization, not the application. Open-source software gets a dependency scan — but that checks libraries, not security design. Internal software gets a manual review — weeks later, covering fragments, producing a ticket.

All three end up in the same environment, handling the same data. The trust evaluation should be a property of the application, not where it came from.

Three contexts. One framework.

The trust criteria are constant. The evidence sources change. The report structure stays the same.

Open-Source Evaluation

"Should we adopt this into our environment?"

Submit a repository. Get a trust report covering security design, data handling, operational readiness, and project health — before you put it in your environment.

Used by: Platform teams, security teams, and engineering leaders evaluating open-source alternatives

Internal Readiness

"Is this ready for production?"

Apply the same trust criteria to your own applications. Replace inconsistent manual reviews with a structured evaluation that functions as a promotion gate before every release.

Used by: AppSec teams, engineering directors, and release managers maintaining internal trust bars

Vendor Attestation

"Can the vendor prove their application meets our trust requirements?"

Require vendors to obtain a Kodepo Trust Report as part of procurement due diligence. An independent evaluation of the actual software — not a self-assessment questionnaire.

Used by: Procurement teams, vendor risk managers, and CISOs at buyer organizations

Five criteria. Every application.

Adapted from how enterprises already evaluate vendor risk — and applied directly to application codebases.

01

Security

"Is this application built to protect itself and its users?"

Authentication design, authorization models, input validation, API hardening, secrets management, secure defaults, and known vulnerabilities — evaluated as a cohesive system.

02

Confidentiality

"If we put real data in, will it stay protected?"

Data exposure through APIs, logging hygiene, encryption posture, tenant isolation, and secrets in configuration. How the application guards what it stores and transmits.

03

Availability

"Can we run this in production without it becoming a liability?"

Failure handling, resource management, graceful degradation, health endpoints, deployment maturity, and horizontal scaling readiness.

04

Processing Integrity

"Does it process data correctly without silently corrupting it?"

Boundary validation, transaction safety, audit trails, idempotency, retry safety, and event delivery reliability.

05

Privacy

"Will this help or hurt our privacy obligations?"

Data minimization, consent mechanisms, PII handling, retention policies, third-party data sharing defaults, and regulatory alignment signals.

The report that accompanies every decision

Structured, comparable, and designed to be attached to adoption approvals, release gates, and vendor evaluations.

acme-payments v4.2 — Trust Report
APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
Security
Auth, authorization, input handling, API hardening
Strong
Confidentiality
Data exposure, logging, encryption, isolation
Strong
Availability
Failure handling, deployment maturity, scaling
Acceptable
Processing Integrity
Audit trails, transactions, data validation
Strong
Privacy
Data minimization, PII handling, retention
Conditional

Require trust, not questionnaires

Today's vendor evaluation is process-based. A SOC 2 report confirms the vendor's organization follows controls. It says nothing about whether the application itself handles data safely, hardens its APIs, or degrades gracefully under failure.

Kodepo fills the gap between "the vendor has good processes" and "the vendor's actual software is trustworthy." Require an attested Trust Report as part of procurement — or vendors can commission one proactively to win deals faster.

01

Buyer requires a Trust Report

As part of procurement due diligence, alongside the SOC 2 and pen test

02

Vendor submits to Kodepo

Independent evaluation against all five trust criteria — not a self-assessment

03

Attested report is shared

Buyer reviews the same structured format used for internal and open-source evaluations

04

Comparable across the stack

One trust framework for every application — vendor, internal, or open-source

Every application, held to the same standard

Compare trust posture across your entire software landscape — regardless of where the application came from.

Open-Source

Before you adopt

Evaluate an open-source application's security design, data handling, and operational readiness before it enters your environment.

Internal

Before you ship

Hold your own applications to the same trust criteria. Use the report as a promotion gate — a structured checkpoint before every production release.

Vendor

Before you sign

Require an attested Trust Report as part of vendor due diligence. Evaluate the actual software — alongside the SOC 2 that evaluates the organization.

Trust is not a gut feeling

Whether you're adopting open-source, shipping internal software, or evaluating a vendor — the question is the same. Kodepo gives you a structured answer.