Veridion
Get startups SOC 2 & ISO 27001 ready in minutes — free
Every founder eventually hits the same wall: a big customer says "we can't sign until you're SOC 2 or ISO 27001 compliant." You go get a quote and it's $20k+, on an annual contract, right when the deal (and your runway) can least afford it.
I hit that wall myself, so I spent the last few months building Veridion to make compliance self-serve and affordable instead of a sales-gated enterprise purchase.
What it does:
• Answer a few questions → instant readiness score for SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR & HIPAA (no demo call)
• 54 controls cross-mapped across all four frameworks, so you do the work once
• 32 read-only integrations + a lightweight agent that auto-collect your audit evidence daily (no more screenshot folders)
• AI-drafted policies and one-click gap analysis
• Free forever plan, paid tiers only when you're ready for the actual audit
It's live at https://veridion.qubrise.com
I'd genuinely love feedback from other founders here especially:
1. Was compliance ever a blocker to closing a deal for you?
2. What did you end up using, and what did it cost?
3. Anything that would make you actually trust a newer tool like this?
Happy to answer anything about the build (Next.js + Clerk + Supabase) too.
6 Comments
The interesting opportunity isn't making compliance cheaper—it's shortening the time between enterprise interest and a signed contract. I'd keep validating whether founders buy Veridion to become compliant or because it helps revenue move forward sooner. That's a much stronger value proposition.
100% you just articulated the positioning better than I have. Nobody wakes up wanting to "be compliant"; they want the deal that's stuck in security review to close. Compliance is the tollgate, not the destination.
You're right that this reframes everything. "Save money on SOC 2" competes on price against Vanta/Drata and it's a race to the bottom. "Stop losing deals while you wait" is a revenue problem, and founders will pay far more to solve a revenue problem than a cost one.
It also changes what I should measure: not "how cheap" but time-to-audit-ready. That's the number that maps to a closed contract.
And you've nailed my actual open question I genuinely don't yet know the split between "buyers who need the certificate to survive procurement" vs. "buyers who just want to move faster." Early signal leans toward the second, but it's exactly what I'm trying to validate right now. How are you thinking about it — have you seen this play out on either side?
I'm glad it resonated.
Your last question is exactly where my mind went as I was reading your reply. I do have a view on that split, but it's based on how I think buyers move through procurement rather than the compliance process itself. I don't think I could explain it properly in a thread without oversimplifying it.
If you're interested, what's the best email to reach you on?
You can reach me at vinayak.ashwin [at] qubrise [dot] com — looking forward to your thoughts on the procurement split
Thanks! I’ve just sent it over.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts whenever you have a chance.
Thanks. Let me take a look at it.