For talent acquisition & HR
You are judged on a shortlist you have no way to verify.
You own time-to-hire. You own the shortlist. And to build it you are handed a keyword search, a pile of applications that all read the same, and a hiring manager with no space in their calendar. CyberHire gives you the technical evidence you have never had.
Same phrases, hundreds of times
- "results-driven" × 0
- "passionate about cyber" × 0
- "strategic thinker" × 0
- "proven track record" × 0
- "cyber enthusiast" × 0
What the inbox looks like on Monday morning. All formatted alike. All claiming everything. All impossible to rank.
Maya Andersen
Verified in live technical assessment
Actually did the work
- Correctly triaged 4/5 alert scenarios
- Escalated the fifth appropriately
- Clean integrity across the session
Why this is so hard
The job is impossible as currently equipped.
- 01
Every application now reads like a strong application.
AI writes the CV, tailors it to your advert and clears your keyword scan. The document that used to carry some signal now carries almost none, and you receive hundreds of them per role.
- 02
You cannot check a single technical claim.
Someone says they have run incident response in a live SOC. There is nothing on that page you can test, and the only person who could tell you is the engineer whose time you are trying not to spend.
- 03
The hiring manager rejects the shortlist.
You spend a week building it. They interview two people and come back with “none of these are technical enough.” You start again, and the vacancy has now been open a month.
- 04
Strong applicants sit unread in your own pipeline.
Whether candidates came from your advert, a referral or an agency, the strong one is often already there. The only reason nobody found them is that nobody had the hours to look properly.
- 05
Time-to-hire is your number, and it keeps slipping.
Every re-run of the shortlist adds weeks. You are measured on a figure largely determined by a screening step you have never been given the tools to do.
- 06
Six months later, nobody can say why.
Someone asks why a particular candidate did not progress. What you have is a recollection and an inbox, not an answer you would want to give twice.
109 applications to read.
Every one written with AI, tailored to your advert, through your keyword scan.
One assessment. One ranked list.
Every applicant meets the same scenario. The ordering does itself.
No way to check a technical claim.
The only person who could tell you is the engineer you are trying not to interrupt.
Verified before you forward it.
Score per skill, with the candidate's actual answers underneath each one.
Shortlist rejected. Start again.
“None of these are technical enough.” Another fortnight on a role already open a month.
A shortlist that survives review.
It arrives with the reasoning attached, so the conversation is about evidence.
Strong applicants left unread.
They are already in your pipeline, but nobody had the hours to look properly.
Your own pipeline, actually read.
Everyone you already have is assessed, whatever door they came through.
Time-to-hire slipping, and it is your number.
Measured on a figure decided by a screening step you were never given tools for.
Days, not weeks, to a shortlist.
The screening runs while you get on with the rest of the requisition.
“Why did we reject them?”
Six months later, all you have is a recollection and an inbox.
A record, not a recollection.
Same scenario, same scoring, every answer retained against the candidate.
What changes
You hand over a shortlist that holds up.
-
It arrives ranked, with the reasons attached.
Not a longer list. The few worth interviewing, ordered by what they actually demonstrated, with a written rationale you can forward to the hiring manager without editing it.
-
No engineering time is spent screening.
The assessment is generated from your job spec, or our team builds it with you. Candidates are scored automatically, so your security team sees a ranked shortlist, not a pile.
-
It runs on the process you already have.
Keep your advert, your careers page and your ATS. Candidates get a link, so there is nothing to install, nothing to migrate and no platform for your team to learn.
The transformation
Hundreds in. The few worth interviewing out.
Two ways to arrive at a shortlist. One ranks by who wrote the best document about themselves. The other ranks by what candidates actually did.
45m
of Q&A
0
real tasks
1
gut feeling
James Wilson
5 yrs SOC, CISSP, GCIH
Sarah Chen
3 yrs IR, SC-200
David Kumar
7 yrs cloud security, CCSP
Emma Brooks
4 yrs AppSec, OSCP
Marcus Lee
6 yrs threat intelligence
Lena Park
5 yrs forensics, GCFA
Tom Reed
8 yrs pentest, OSEP
Priya Patel
2 yrs SOC analyst
Olivia Stone
4 yrs detection engineering
Daniel Cole
6 yrs malware analysis
Aisha Khan
3 yrs GRC, CISA
Carlos Vega
7 yrs IR, GCIA
Maya Andersen
5 yrs SOC + KQL specialism
Noah Tremblay
Self-described "cyber ninja"
Robert Singh
10 yrs CIO, transitioning
Hannah Walker
Recent grad, CompTIA Security+
Jordan Li
5 yrs SOC, GCIH, KQL strong
Priya Raman
4 yrs SOC, Sentinel exp
James Wilson
5 yrs SOC, CISSP, GCIH
Sarah Chen
3 yrs IR, SC-200
David Kumar
7 yrs cloud security, CCSP
Emma Brooks
4 yrs AppSec, OSCP
Marcus Lee
6 yrs threat intelligence
Lena Park
5 yrs forensics, GCFA
Tom Reed
8 yrs pentest, OSEP
Priya Patel
2 yrs SOC analyst
Olivia Stone
4 yrs detection engineering
Daniel Cole
6 yrs malware analysis
Aisha Khan
3 yrs GRC, CISA
Carlos Vega
7 yrs IR, GCIA
Maya Andersen
5 yrs SOC + KQL specialism
Noah Tremblay
Self-described "cyber ninja"
Robert Singh
10 yrs CIO, transitioning
Hannah Walker
Recent grad, CompTIA Security+
Jordan Li
5 yrs SOC, GCIH, KQL strong
Priya Raman
4 yrs SOC, Sentinel exp
19
tests sat
15m
to review
8
to shortlist
Ranked by performance
Maya Andersen
94
STRONG
Jordan Li
91
STRONG
Priya Raman
87
STRONGOlivia Stone
82
SOLIDDavid Kumar
79
SOLIDCarlos Vega
76
SOLIDAisha Khan
73
SOLIDLena Park
71
SOLIDA hunch
is all a talk-only interview leaves you with
15 minutes
picking the people who really know their stuff
The question everyone asks first
Adding an assessment does not cost you applicants.
The fear is that a technical stage will thin the pipeline. In practice candidates are being asked to show what they can do instead of filling in another form, which is what most of them wanted. Completion is tracked per campaign, so you can see the drop-off rather than guess at it.
SOC Analyst Tier 2 Screen
24
Invited
19
Completed
78
Avg score
8
Shortlist
Score distribution
6 candidates scored 80 or above
Skills across the cohort
Maya Andersen
94
TOP 1Jordan Li
91
TOP 2Priya Raman
87
TOP 3Fits the workflow you have
Connect the ATS you already use.
Upload candidates securely, or connect your ATS and let it sync. These are the platforms we have tested end to end, including writing the result back against the candidate record.
-
-
Admin setup -
-
-
-
Not listed? Our integration provider covers more than 60 recruiting platforms. Tell us which one you run and we will look at enabling it.
What you can stand behind
Structured, consistent, and written down.
Every candidate meets the same scenario and is scored the same way. That is more consistent than a CV screen, and considerably more consistent than an interview. When a decision is questioned later, you have a record rather than a recollection.
- Time to shortlist, cut from weeks to days
- Hiring manager acceptance, because the shortlist carries evidence
- Strong candidates surfaced from the pipeline you already have
- The same scenario and the same scoring for every candidate
- A written rationale behind every name you put forward
- Every answer and signal retained against the candidate
The objections you will get, answered.
Will adding an assessment cost us applicants?
Strong candidates tend to prefer it, because it is the first stage that lets them show what they can do rather than describe it. Candidates get automatic reminders, and completion is tracked per campaign so you can see exactly what happened rather than guessing.
Do I need to understand the technical content?
No. The assessment is generated from the job spec, or our team builds it with you from a briefing on the role. Results come back scored, ranked and summarised in plain language, ready to forward to the hiring manager.
How does it fit our ATS and our existing process?
Invite the candidates you already have by link or secure upload, or connect your ATS directly. Your advert, your careers page and your workflow stay exactly as they are.
What if the hiring manager still disagrees with the shortlist?
Then you have something concrete to disagree about. The report shows what each candidate did, per skill, with the underlying answers. That turns a conversation about impressions into a conversation about evidence, which is a much easier conversation to be on the right side of.
Is it fair to candidates?
Every candidate faces the same scenario and is scored the same way, which removes a great deal of the variability that makes CV screening and unstructured interviews so inconsistent. People without the perfect background get a route to prove they can do the work.
How quickly can we start?
Talk to us about one live role. We set up your workspace, the assessment is built around the role, and candidates can start the moment you invite them. There is no recurring commitment and nothing to unwind if you only ever run one.
Ready when you are