VCRI Learn · About the Institute
Why VCRI? What The Value Chain Risk Institute is, the problem it exists to fix, and how to use what it has built. Joshua Marpet and Cairn Viktor
This deck introduces The Value Chain Risk Institute, a nonprofit working on vendor security. It covers the problem, the method, and the free tools you can use today. It was written by Joshua Marpet, the Institute's founder, and Cairn Viktor, an AI research partner at the Institute who is credited by name on the work he does. The problem
Vendors are grading their own homework. Questionnaires, annual audits and self-attestation decide whether we trust the companies we depend on. Those tools were designed for a world that no longer exists.
If you work anywhere, you depend on vendors: software, cloud, IT providers. The way most organizations check those vendors is to ask them to fill out a form about themselves. Nobody verifies the answers, and the answers are a snapshot. That gap is why VCRI exists. Why the old way breaks
Three problems with vendor assessment today Questionnaires don’t verify
Vendors self-report. Nobody checks. The incentive is to check every box, not to tell the truth.
Audits are snapshots
An annual audit measures one moment. Attackers work continuously. The gap is measured in months.
Every buyer asks differently
Each customer sends its own form, so the same vendor answers the same questions again and again.
These three points come straight from the Institute's homepage. Notice that none of them blames vendors. Honest vendors are stuck in the same system: they spend time on paperwork that does not make anyone safer, and buyers still cannot see what is real. Who we are
A neutral nonprofit The motto: inside data, not guesses.
What VCRI is
The Value Chain Risk Institute is a nonprofit and a neutral party.
Its purpose: a trusted clearinghouse for vendor security posture evidence.
How it behaves
“We grade evidence, we do not sell your data, and no vendor can buy a better result.”
Methods are open, so anyone can check how a result is reached.
Neutral matters here. A scoring body that vendors could pay for a better grade would just recreate the problem. The quote on the right is the Institute's own promise, from its Beacon beta page. Open methods mean you do not have to trust VCRI's word: you can check the arithmetic. The method
The Cyber Assurance Matrix (CAM) Six TIPPSS dimensions
Trust, Identity, Privacy, Protection, Safety, Security.
From the TIPPSS framework (IEEE/UL 2933).
Six PPTDF-AI asset classes
People, Processes, Technology, Data, Facilities, AI.
Adopted by the VCRI board on March 16, 2026.
Five maturity levels
Each of the 36 cells gets a level from 1 (Initial) to 5 (Optimizing).
Based on the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) scale.
Picture a grid: six kinds of assets down the side, six security dimensions across the top, 36 cells. Each cell asks how mature a vendor is at, say, Identity for People, or Safety for Facilities. The asset classes come from the Secure Controls Framework, with AI added as a sixth class, so nobody argues over whether something is a device or an application. The core idea
The gap is the risk Traditional risk asks you to guess likelihood and impact. CAM asks what is unverified.
Required level
How mature a vendor needs to be in each cell, given what you depend on it for.
→
Actual level
How mature the evidence shows the vendor really is.
→
This is the single idea to remember. Risk is not a vibe or a color on a dashboard. It is the measured distance between where a vendor is and where it needs to be, cell by cell. Close the gap with real evidence and the risk goes down, provably. Open scoring
BeaconScore: check the arithmetic Free, runs in your browser, licensed CC BY 4.0. Score a vendor, or yourself.
Published rubrics
Six rubrics, one per PPTDF-AI asset class, each scored 0 to 5.
Every weight is public.
Clear grades
Grades A through F.
A very weak dimension caps the grade, so one strength cannot hide a failure.
Changes in the open
Release notes record every rubric change and why, so results can be re-run and compared.
BeaconScore lives at valuechainrisk.org/scorer. Because the rubrics and weights are published, two people scoring the same evidence should get the same answer, and anyone can challenge a weight. There is also an examiner-style report view for people who know the format bank examiners use. Evidence, not answers
Beacon Collector (beta) Open source. Beta scores use a draft method and are labeled that way.
Runs on your machines
Reads the security tools you already run: scanner results, SBOMs, identity-provider exports and more.
Your evidence stays with you.
Sealed and scored
Every item is hashed; the package carries one fingerprint and a signature. Change one byte and verification fails.
Scored against the open rubrics on a one-page results view.
An SBOM, or software bill of materials, is a list of the components inside a piece of software. The collector turns what your systems already produce into a tamper-evident package, so you can prove later exactly what you had on a given day. It is open source and in beta, and you can sign up at valuechainrisk.org/beta. Free tools
Built to be used, not sold Cyber Resilience Act builders
Cyber Manual Builder, TARA Builder, and Context and Conditions of Use Builder.
Run in your browser; nothing uploaded.
AIBOM Constellation Inventory
Lists everything an AI agent depends on as a CycloneDX AI bill of materials.
Open source, Apache-2.0.
AI Cognitive Security Framework
Can an AI system be trusted with what it reads, remembers and does?
7 dimensions, 40 questions.
Kits for small organizations
Small businesses, small utilities, community banks and credit unions, rural hospitals.
Plus a plain-language glossary.
The EU Cyber Resilience Act, or CRA, requires a user security manual and a risk assessment; TARA stands for threat analysis and risk assessment. The small-organization kits are tiered field guides for places with no security team, and several map a free or open-source tool to every CIS Control. Everything is at valuechainrisk.org/tools. Open research
State of the Supply Chain A quarterly report on open-source supply-chain risk, with methodology and data you can check.
13.1 million
open-source packages classified in the Q3 2026 issue, the entire published corpus.
2 to 3×
how far the headline abandonment number moves between equally defensible definitions. The honest unit is a band.
Open data
Band table, watch list and verification evidence published with every issue, plus the mistakes caught along the way.
Source: VCRI, State of the Supply Chain Q3 2026, valuechainrisk.org/state-of-supply-chain/
The Q3 issue found that the abandonment percentage everyone quotes is really a range, depending on how you define still maintained. It also documented three false signals the team caught before publishing. That habit, showing the work and the errors, is the point of the whole Institute. Get involved
What to do Monday Score one vendor, or your own team, with BeaconScore at valuechainrisk.org/scorer. Take the two-minute Security Tools Poll, so the Beacon Collector learns the most-used tools first. Find your local security groups, or share a field kit, from valuechainrisk.org/community. Read a State of the Supply Chain report and send a correction if you find one. Reach the Institute at info@valuechainrisk.org. Every one of these is free and takes less than an hour. Students and job hunters: the community page lists groups like ISSA, ISACA, OWASP, BSides and WoSEC that meet near you. Practitioners: scoring one real vendor is the fastest way to see the difference between an answer and evidence. Free to use, teach and share. This deck is part of the VCRI Learn series. Use it in your class, your team meeting or your chapter, with credit to The Value Chain Risk Institute.
valuechainrisk.org/learn