# GreySec RED — Sales Specification
**Product:** GreySec Exploit Development Pipeline
**Status:** Internal — for Adam review
**Date:** 2026-05-07
**Classification:** Internal only — no client-facing numbers

---

## Market Analysis

### Why Security Teams Need Fast Exploit Development

Every offensive security engagement has the same bottleneck: getting from a binary target to a working exploit. It takes time. The binary is different every time. The vulnerability class changes. The mitigations change. Even for experienced exploit developers, it's 4-8 hours of focused work per binary.

Now think about a red team engagement with 10 targets. Or a CVE research project with 30 binaries to assess. Or a CTF competition with 15 challenges. The economics don't work if every binary requires 4+ hours of manual RE.

The market has tools for this — but they're either:
1. Manual (expensive, slow, expert-dependent)
2. Commercial products (Cobalt Strike, Immunity CANVAS — not RE tools, just C2 platforms)
3. Open source one-offs (useful but not turnkey)

What nobody has is a fast, AI-augmented pipeline that takes a binary and produces a working, tested exploit. Until now.

### Who Actually Pays for AI-Augmented RE

1. **MSSPs running structured red team programs**
   - They have a quarterly cadence of engagement deliveries
   - They need to assess 10-20 binary targets per engagement
   - Manual RE burns into their margin
   - Willing to pay: $1,000-3,000/month for speed

2. **Exploit developers and vulnerability researchers**
   - They assess third-party binaries for CVEs
   - They need fast turnaround to meet disclosure deadlines
   - They write PoCs for every confirmed vulnerability
   - Willing to pay: $500-1,500/month (they understand the value of speed)

3. **CTF teams and competitive hacking groups**
   - Time is everything in CTF
   - Binary challenges are the bottleneck
   - Team pricing: $200-500/month for a 5-person team
   - Willing to pay: lower price point but high volume

4. **Security training organizations**
   - They build binary exploitation exercises for training curricula
   - They need to solve challenges quickly to build course content
   - Willing to pay: $300-800/month

### The Competitive Gap

Manual RE takes 4-8 hours per binary at $150-300/hr consulting rates = $600-2,400 per binary.

GreySec RED targets $300-800 per binary at 20-90 minute turnaround — 5-10x faster, at 50% the cost.

---

## Competitive Landscape

| Tool | Type | Cost | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|------|------|------|-----------|------------|
| Manual RE + exploit dev | Consultant | $150-300/hr | Expert judgment, any target | 4-8 hrs per binary, expensive at scale |
| Metasploit module dev | Consultant | $100-200/hr | Framework integration | Still requires expert, not automated |
| Immunity CANVAS | Commercial | $500+/month | Some automation | Windows-only, dated, slow development |
| Core Impact | Commercial | $8,000+/year | Automated | Expensive, dated, heavy GUI |
| Ghidra + manual | Open source | Free | Powerful RE, any binary | Manual only, no exploit generation |
| radare2 + manual | Open source | Free | Full RE control | Steep learning curve, no exploit gen |
| pwntools (self-use) | Open source | Free | Great for exploit devs | Requires expert, no AI assist |
| ChatGPT/GPT-4 | API | Per-token | Good code generation | No context for binary RE, hallucinations on offsets |
| GreySec RED | **AI-augmented service** | **TBD** | **Validated exploits, struct.json automation, local model** | **V1 (new, x86/x64 Linux only)** |

**GreySec RED's key differentiation:**
- Validated against real binary (not just generated — actually tested and PASSED)
- struct.json for CI/CD integration (no other tool outputs machine-readable exploit metadata)
- Speed: 20-90 min per binary vs. 4-8 hours manual
- Local AI model (abliterator) for better exploit code than cloud models

---

## Buyer Personas

### Persona 1: Devon, Lead Exploit Developer at Cerberus Security

**Who:** Devon leads a 4-person exploit development team at a security research firm. They do vulnerability research for CVEs, build PoCs, and occasionally support red team engagements with custom exploits.

**Pain:** Their CVE pipeline has a backlog of 30 binaries to assess. At 6 hours each, that's 180 hours of RE work. They have two researchers who could be doing novel research instead of solving known binary challenges.

**What he really wants:** Drop a binary, get a working exploit, move on. Free up his researchers for novel work.

**What he'll pay:** $1,500/month for a tool that clears half his backlog.

**Buying trigger:** After losing a bid on a large-scale red team engagement because they couldn't demonstrate fast binary assessment capability.

---

### Persona 2: Aisha, CTF Team Captain — Phantom Division

**Who:** Aisha captains a 6-person competitive hacking team. They compete in 10-15 CTFs per year. Binary challenges are their strongest category but also their most time-intensive.

**Pain:** They lose 15-30 minutes on hard binary challenges because RE takes too long. They've placed 3rd in national CTFs by a combined margin of 10 minutes.

**What she really wants:** A binary goes in, an exploit comes out validated against the real challenge binary.

**What she'll pay:** $400/month for team pricing.

**Buying trigger:** After placing 4th in a major CTF by 8 minutes — they had the right exploit approach but ran out of time to finish the RE.

---

### Persona 3: Dr. Michael Torres, Security Researcher at Vela Systems

**Who:** Michael does vulnerability research at a mid-size security firm. He spends 60% of his time on RE for third-party binaries and 40% on novel CVE discovery. He needs to assess whether a binary is worth pursuing for full disclosure.

**Pain:** He gets a binary, spends 2 hours REing it, and determines it's not exploitable. He could have spent that time on the next one. He has a pipeline of 40 binaries and needs to triage them fast.

**What he really wants:** A triage report: is this exploitable, what's the vulnerability class, what's the difficulty?

**What he'll pay:** $800/month.

**Buying trigger:** After missing a disclosure deadline because he spent too long on binaries that turned out to be not worth pursuing.

---

## Pricing Framework (Internal)

### Direct Cost Basis

| Cost Item | Per Beginner Binary |
|-----------|---------------------|
| AI compute (Ollama, local) | $0.05-0.15 |
| Human review (5 min at $105/hr) | $8.75 |
| Infrastructure (Kali container) | $0.50 |
| **Total** | **~$9-10/binary** |

At 5x margin: ~$45-50 per beginner binary.
At 6x margin: ~$55-60 per beginner binary.

For a monthly subscription at 20 binaries: $900-1,200/month all-in.

### Build vs. Buy

| Approach | Cost per Binary | Time per Binary |
|----------|----------------|----------------|
| Manual RE (consultant) | $600-2,400 | 4-8 hours |
| Manual RE (internal expert) | $80-200 in-house | 4-8 hours |
| GreySec RED | ~$50-150 | 20-90 minutes |

GreySec RED: 5-10x faster, 50-80% cheaper than manual consulting.

---

## Objection Handling

**"Why not just use ChatGPT? It's cheaper."**
ChatGPT can write code but it doesn't understand your specific binary. It doesn't run against your target. It hallucinates offsets and wrong addresses. GreySec RED's model is specifically fine-tuned for offensive security tasks and validates the exploit against the real binary before calling it done.

**"How is this different from Metasploit?"**
Metasploit has pre-built modules for known vulnerabilities. GreySec RED builds an exploit for a binary you've already identified as vulnerable — one that doesn't have a Metasploit module yet. It's the gap between "I know this is vulnerable" and "I have a working exploit."

**"Isn't this just for hackers?"**
It's the same RE skills your security team uses to reverse-engineer malware, audit third-party binaries, and assess vendor software for vulnerabilities. We use it for our own red team engagements. Your binary analysis team can use it for the same purpose.

**"What if the exploit gets it wrong?"**
Every exploit we produce is tested against the real binary. If it fails, test-results.md tells you why and which parameter needs adjustment. You're not flying blind.

**"Can it handle real-world binaries, not just CTF challenges?"**
V1 supports x86/x64 Linux binaries. Real-world binaries are harder — we handle the vulnerability class and offsets correctly, but ASLR/DEP may require a ROP chain that needs manual tuning. The analysis and struct.json are accurate; the exploit may need a human review for advanced mitigations. V2 adds ROP chain builder integration to address this.