The relentless churn of cyber security news creates a suffocating sense of vulnerability overload. New exploits surface daily, their details splashed across the web like a constant reminder of our and our organization’s fragile existence. We are bombarded with alerts, an endless list of “urgent vulnerabilities” that breeds a crippling sense of patching fatigue. The sheer volume feels insurmountable, leading many to believe patching is a losing battle against an ever-growing tide. But here’s the truth: we can’t fix them all. So how do we navigate this treacherous landscape? 

Commoditization of Vulnerabilities: A Double-Edged Sword 

Nowadays, we know everything there is to know about vulnerabilities. But while it empowers security teams to identify and address threats faster, it also creates a sense of information overload. The solace they often find in exposure management vendors “top 10” vulnerability lists, while helpful, is insufficient. Cyber security is a dynamic landscape, and the critical vulnerability of today may be tomorrow’s footnote, leaving significant risks unaddressed and zero-day attacks unchecked.  

Risk-based vulnerability prioritization (RBVP) is still the reigning champion when it comes to vulnerability remediation; well, to some extent. The reality is that not all vulnerabilities can be patched or patched immediately. In fact, most organizations would prefer not to patch at all unless they must. 

Compensating Controls: A Security Lifeline in Rough Waters 

Compensating controls are security measures implemented when a primary security requirement, like patching a specific vulnerability, is deemed too difficult or impractical. They are the alternative pathway to achieving the same security objective. Compensating controls can take various forms, including network segmentation, intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDS/IPS), and multi-factor authentication (MFA). However, their effectiveness hinges on meticulous evaluation and implementation tailored to neutralize the threats posed by specific unpatched vulnerabilities. 

The Strategic Advantages of Compensating Controls 

In the face of relentless vulnerabilities, compensating controls offer a tempting solution with several key benefits: 

• Prioritization: Organizations can strategically focus patching efforts on the most critical vulnerabilities while mitigating the risk of unpatched ones with compensating controls. This allows for a more targeted and efficient approach to security. 
• Reduced Downtime: Especially in business-critical organizations like healthcare, manufacturing, and even financial services, where even brief downtime can have severe consequences, compensating controls can help avoid the risks associated with patching critical systems. This ensures continued operation while addressing security concerns. 
• Resource Optimization: Security teams are often stretched thin. By leveraging compensating controls for unmatchable vulnerabilities, they can free up valuable resources from the endless patching cycle and focus on proactive threat hunting and security improvements. This allows for a more holistic approach to cyber security. 

The Burning Question: Can We Rely Solely on Compensating Controls? 

While compensating controls offer a strategic approach, they are not a magic bullet. Several key concerns need to be addressed: 

1. Effectiveness: Can the implemented controls truly mitigate the risk posed by the unpatched vulnerability? A thorough exposure assessment is crucial to determine the effectiveness of the chosen compensating control. Additionally, ongoing monitoring is essential to ensure its continued efficacy in the face of evolving threats. 

1. Documentation and Approval: Organizations must meticulously document and justify each compensating control. This includes a clear explanation of the rationale behind the control, a detailed description of its implementation, and an exposure assessment demonstrating its effectiveness. 

1. Resource Intensive: Developing, implementing, and maintaining compensating controls requires dedicated resources and expertise. Organizations need to factor in the cost of additional personnel or training needs when considering this approach. 

Compensating controls are a double-edged sword. Used strategically, they can be a valuable tool in managing vulnerability fatigue. However, they should never be a replacement for patching whenever possible. The key lies in a risk-based approach that prioritizes patching critical vulnerabilities while leveraging compensating controls for those that are unpatchable due to legitimate constraints. 

Beyond Patching and Compensating Controls: Building a Robust Defense 

A layered security strategy is crucial for a robust defense. This includes vulnerability assessment to provide a systematic review of security weaknesses and categorize them based on severity and impact. This vital process enables organizations to understand their security posture comprehensively and prioritize vulnerabilities for remediation. 

Following the identification of vulnerabilities, the strategy expands to include compensating controls and traditional patching. However, the deployment of these measures must be informed by a thorough exposure assessment, which evaluates the potential impact and exploitability of identified vulnerabilities in the context of the organization’s unique security infrastructure. This assessment guides the selection and implementation of the most appropriate remediation techniques, whether through patching, compensating controls, or a combination of both.