We built ruledoc because firewall compliance is broken.
A short, honest answer. Skim the table of contents, read the section you care about, ignore the rest.
01The problem.
Every audit window looks the same. Someone hands the IT team a spreadsheet of controls. Someone else exports the firewall config. A junior engineer spends a week cross-referencing rule numbers against framework clauses. Half the answers are guesses. The auditor gets a PDF, signs it, and the file goes into a drawer until next year.
This was tolerable when NIS2 and SOC 2 were nice-to-haves. It is not tolerable now that NIS2 is law in the EU and customers refuse to sign without a SOC 2 report. The cost of the manual workflow now exceeds the cost of buying a tool that does it.
02What we built.
ruledoc reads the firewall config, parses it into a vendor-neutral model, and runs that model against six compliance frameworks at once. The output is an audit-grade report with line-level citations and plain-English remediation paragraphs. The kind of report an auditor signs off on.
We support ten firewall platforms. The same config that goes in for NIS2 gets you a SOC 2 view, a PCI-DSS view, an ISO 27001 view, a CIS Controls view, and a NIST CSF view. No extra work.
03Who it is for.
- IT managers facing an audit and tired of building the same spreadsheet by hand.
- MSPs running multiple client estates who need consistent reporting across vendors.
- Compliance teams who want evidence on demand, not once a year.
- Internal audit who want a reproducible second opinion on the network layer.
04How we work.
Single-tenant data isolation per customer. Configs encrypted at rest. Retention windows tied to your tier: 90 days on Single Report, 1 year on Pro. DPA available on request.
We are based in Sweden and operate under EU data protection law. Customer configs stay in EU regions. Sub-processors are listed at /legal/sub-processors.
The product is built on a small set of opinionated decisions: a single vendor-neutral format that every parser targets, per-framework risk engines that share the same evidence, and reproducible PDFs with a SHA-256 stamped at generation time. The deeper architecture is in the docs.
Questions?
Hit us with the awkward ones too. The kind that start with "but what about..." and end with a vendor we forgot to mention.