Straight answers.

Alongside integrations, not instead of them.

Where a solid API or data integration exists and justifies its cost, that's the right way to move data between two systems. Crosscut isn't a substitute for one.

It covers the work those integrations leave to people:

• Work that spans applications that no single integration connects.
• Applications with no data feed at all, where the screen is the only interface.
• Systems that change faster than an integration can be rebuilt to match.
• Work that isn't yet common enough to justify an engineering effort. Crosscut can also help you find out whether it will be.

Both, in the same flow.

Many mission environments bundle a set of tools into one workspace: a map view, a data explorer, country and reference pages. A Crosscut flow can move through those tools in the order your analysts actually use them, then carry the result on into the other systems the job touches.

That lets each organization build flows for its own analysis and production work, instead of accepting a single generic path through the tools.

A flow edit, not a development effort.

New releases bring new fields, new data and new capabilities, and sometimes a program delivers an entirely new application. With Crosscut, taking that on means an author updating a flow. No code changes and no development tail.

Crosscut isn't built around any particular application, so your flows can keep pace as the mission and its systems change.

Yes. Build it as a flow first and see who runs it.

Put a lightweight version of the workflow in front of your people as a Crosscut flow. Crosscut shows how many people actually run it, which gives you real usage to justify, or not, a hard-coded integration with the applications of record.

If nobody uses it, you've spent a flow, not a program budget.

They learn the job by running it.

A new analyst usually waits for a training seat, reads pages of documentation and procedures, or teaches themselves. With Crosscut, they can run the flows their organization already uses and watch each step happen in the real application. They learn on actual mission work, the way their organization does it, and start contributing sooner.

The knowledge also stays put. A flow records how your organization does a task, so that know-how is kept without a separate documentation effort, and it doesn't leave when the person who built the flow rotates out.

A person checks every step, so a bad read gets caught and doesn't carry forward.

Screens change. A field gets renamed, a layout shifts, an unexpected dialog appears. RECON, Crosscut's screen reader, doesn't quietly carry on with a wrong value, because each step is gated by the person running the flow. You see what was read before the next step uses it.

If a read is wrong, you have two options: have RECON read the screen again, or enter the correct value yourself and continue. Then use Teach RECON to show it where the value actually sits on that screen, so later runs read it correctly.

Each application's own rules apply. Crosscut waits for you.

Crosscut follows the authentication and timeout requirements of every application in the flow and never works around them. When the flow reaches an application that needs you to sign in, it prompts you to do so.

If a smart-card prompt, MFA challenge or re-authentication appears mid-run, the run waits for you. A session that has quietly expired isn't treated as still signed in either. The run pauses, and once you've re-authenticated, you resume it from the step where it stopped rather than starting over.

No, by design.

Crosscut assumes an operator is at the keyboard. It does the work inside your applications, and a person signs in when an application asks and confirms each step before the flow moves on. Keeping a person on every run is what lets Crosscut stop safely on a bad read or an expired session.

A tamper-evident record of every decision, not just a pause in the UI.

Crosscut keeps an append-only, hash-chained record of each run. Each entry is chained to the one before it, so any after-the-fact edit or deletion breaks the chain and shows. For every decision it records:

The evidence behind each decision, meaning the values read and the captured screen frame, stays on the operator's machine. The central record holds a commitment to that evidence, so it can be checked against the record later.

Unclassified pilot today. No authorization yet.

Crosscut is currently in an unclassified pilot. It does not hold an ATO, an IATT or an Impact Level authorization today.

Air-gapped operation is a posture we designed Crosscut for, but it isn't an accredited configuration yet. If your environment needs a path to authorization, talk to us early and we'll tell you honestly where things stand.