Validating What Matters
Assurance, Adversarial Testing, and the Cost of AI-Driven Validation in the DIB
As CMMC policy evolves, defense contractors are facing a bigger question:
What actually proves your environment can protect CUI?
Independent assessments and AI-driven penetration testing validate different things. Neither tells the whole story.
In this new white paper, Terrence J. McGraw, CEO of Cape Endeavors, examines where each approach is strong, where each falls short, and what a shift toward continuous AI-driven validation could mean for the Defense Industrial Base.
Inside the white paper
-
How breaches actually happen, and which validation methods can detect them
-
A combined assurance model that layers three capabilities
-
How AI security tools are billed, and the functions that drive cost
-
Worked cost scenarios for on-demand and continuous testing
-
Cost levers you control: scope, hygiene, and cadence
-
Seven questions to ask any AI penetration testing vendor
By the numbers
31% of breaches started with vulnerability exploitation, now the #1 entry point (2026 Verizon DBIR)
48% of breaches involved a third party
110 vs. −170: one contractor's self-reported SPRS score, compared with its DIBCAC assessed score
~$50K/yr: illustrative token cost of continuous AI testing for a 500-host environment, before vendor markup
DOWNLOAD WHITE PAPER
