One mistake in your stack reaches every client at once.Founded by a software developer who owns a software company.

General liability

Injury and damage at your own offices and at client sites your engineers work in.

Without it — The certificate line every client onboarding portal asks for first, even from a business with no premises risk to speak of.

Technology E&O

A configuration, migration or recommendation that cost a client money.

Without it — The routine claim against an MSP and not a cyber claim.

Cyber liability, first and third party

Your own breach, and liability for client environments you administer.

Without it — An MSP holds privileged access to every client network it manages.

Aggregation exposure

Limits set against a supply-chain event hitting many clients simultaneously.

Without it — A per-claim limit sized for one client is exhausted by the first ten.

Contingent business interruption

Loss when a vendor or platform you depend on goes down.

Without it — A tool in your stack failing stops your service to everyone.

Contractual requirements

The limits and additional insured wording client MSAs demand.

Without it — Enterprise clients will not sign without evidence.

Group health and benefits

Medical, dental and vision for a small technical team, priced properly each year.

Without it — Engineers compare packages line by line, and a plan that quietly worsened at renewal is noticed immediately.

What is the aggregation problem?

That MSP losses are not one client at a time. Your RMM, your backup platform, your credential store and your privileged access reach every client you serve, so a compromise or a bad push is a simultaneous event across the whole book, and the supply-chain attacks of recent years targeted exactly that. It means the limit has to be sized against the portfolio rather than the largest client, which is a different and larger number than most MSPs first buy.

Our clients ask us to sign security commitments. Does insurance cover those?

Only up to a point, and the assumed obligations are where MSPs get hurt. Contractual liability coverage generally responds to liability you would have had anyway, not to obligations you took on voluntarily, so promising uptime, a recovery time objective, or to indemnify a client for any breach can create exposure the policy does not follow. Have the MSA reviewed against the policy before signing, not after a claim reveals the gap.

Do we need coverage for our clients’ breaches?

You need coverage for your liability arising from them, which is the part MSPs underestimate. When a client is breached, the first question is whether the provider managing their security should have prevented it: patching, MFA, backup integrity, alert response. That claim is against you, it blends E&O and cyber, and it is much easier to handle when one insurer holds both rather than two disputing which policy is on the hook.

A new client’s MSA requires limits above our current policy. How fast can that change?

Usually within days on a complete submission. Send the client’s insurance exhibit, any security questionnaire they sent, your revenue and your current declarations page. The fix is either excess above your existing technology E&O and cyber or a move to a market writing a higher primary limit, and both put the full required limit on the certificate.

Tech contract insurance requirements, clause by clause