Rapid7 InsightCloudSec
2026-11-02-7e9eb024 commercialThe section your link pointed to isn't on Rapid7 InsightCloudSec's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Rapid7 InsightCloudSec is a cloud security platform that monitors multi-cloud environments to detect misconfigurations, enforce compliance policies, and manage risk across AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.
DIVVY_IAC_WORKER_POOL_ENABLED=true
curl -X GET 'https://<insightcloudsec-host>/api/pack/<pack_id>/insight-rule-mappings' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <api_token>' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json'
curl -X POST 'https://<insightcloudsec-host>/api/map-to-compliance-rule' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <api_token>' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"pack_id": "<pack_id>", "rule_id": "<rule_id>", "insight_ids": ["<insight_id_1>", "<insight_id_2>"]}'
curl -X POST 'https://<insightcloudsec-host>/api/pack/<pack_id>/rules/create' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <api_token>' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"name": "Internal Policy 2.1"}'
Summary
Rapid7 InsightCloudSec is a commercial cloud-native application protection platform (CNAPPCNAPPA cloud-native application protection platform that combines checks across cloud configuration, workloads and development. It helps teams connect risks that separate tools might report apart.) that runs as a SaaSSaaSSoftware delivered over the internet and run on the provider's infrastructure, so the buyer pays a subscription instead of installing or operating anything locally. service for continuously assessing cloud accounts against security and compliance standards. It is aimed at cloud security and compliance teams who need to catch misconfigurations across AWS, Azure, and Kubernetes environments and map findings to frameworks like CISCISA nonprofit that publishes consensus-based configuration benchmarks and controls for hardening operating systems, cloud environments, and software; cyber tools use it as a ready-made compliance baseline. Benchmarks and HITRUSTHITRUSTA US-based certification framework for healthcare data security, maintained by the HITRUST Alliance, that maps controls from HIPAA, NIST, and ISO into a single assessable standard tools can target to prove compliance. CSFCSFThe NIST Cybersecurity Framework, a set of outcomes for managing cybersecurity risk. Organizations use it to describe their current posture, priorities and improvement goals.. It works through Insights that flag risky resource configurations — exposed snapshots, unencrypted databases, storage services without managed identities — and lets teams group these into compliance packs with custom rules via API or UI, while runtime sensors report health status for connected Kubernetes clusters. It sits in the CNAPP category alongside cloud security posture management tools generally, rather than any product named in its own materials. Launched in 2016, it continues to ship dated releases, with its most recent update 43 days ago.
Rapid7 InsightCloudSec is a cloud security platform that monitors multi-cloud environments to detect misconfigurations, enforce compliance policies, and manage risk across AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.
How Rapid7 InsightCloudSec helps
Which cloud resources are misconfigured against a standard like CIS or HITRUST right now?
scans connected AWS, Azure, and Kubernetes accounts with Insights and maps each flagged resource to the specific benchmark control it fails, including newer packs like CIS EKS v2.0.0 and HITRUST CSF v11.7.1
Which databases and storage resources are missing encryption or identity controls?
Insights check for conditions like missing Customer Managed Key encryption on Aurora, DocumentDB and PostgreSQL, and Data Factories running without a Managed Identity or with credentials stored inline instead of in Key Vault
Are my Kubernetes clusters actually reachable by the runtime sensor?
the Clusters page and Resources Listing show a live health status of Healthy, Disconnected, or Degraded for each cluster's runtime sensor
Why did this container runtime detection fire, and how far back does the risk go?
the Root Cause Analysis tab generates a summary with a Prevention Window showing when the underlying posture risk first appeared relative to the incident, plus Primary Causes with confidence scores and Contributing Factors
Which load balancers or snapshots are exposed in ways that violate policy?
query filters flag conditions like HTTP listeners not redirecting to HTTPS or snapshots accessible to the public, split now into separate snapshot-versus-database-snapshot checks after the old combined filter was deprecated
How much of a compliance pack's coverage comes from my own custom rules versus inherited ones?
the Compliance Rules tab lists user-defined rules like a custom control alongside rules inherited from a base pack, with inherited ones shown read-only so the source of each rule is clear
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
Five scores for Rapid7 InsightCloudSec, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail Rapid7 InsightCloudSec puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Commercials
pricing & packaging history · Rapid7 vendor page13 readings of Rapid7's pricing page since Oct 2021, with 1 relaunch of its plan lineup and 2 changes to what its plans include — each one dated, compared with the reading before it, and explained for someone buying the tool.
Pricing and packaging history is included with Researcher and Business. See how every vendor we track sells, and how that has changed over time, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Plans by offering
Each offering on the pricing page links to its own page of plans, read at its latest capture.
Plan relaunches
Plans, prices and descriptions are quoted from the vendor's own pricing page as we read it on each date. A plan missing from a later reading is shown as no longer listed on the page — a statement about the page, not the product. Readings that failed to show any plans are left out rather than read as a change.
Website history
metasploit.com, every changeRapid7's home page and 4 more pages as they looked each month from August 2021 to October 2026: 37 renders, 0 changes of tagline or palette. Step through them, play them, or put any two months side by side.
Website history is included with Researcher and Business.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →← → or h l a month · Shift a year · [ ] previous / next change · Space play · 1 2 3 page · T whole page · C compare · F full size
← → or h l the right month · Shift the left · S swap · W wipe · T whole page · Esc back
Rebranding timeline
Dates bound when a change appeared between captures. Possible rebrands are AI suggestions; a redesign alone does not establish a rebrand.
Releases
19 entries
No entries match these filters.
- November 20261
- October 20263
- September 20267
- August 20263
- July 20265
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.
Choose a badge style and copy the code →