Why Effective CTEM Must be an Intelligence-Led Program
好的,我现在需要帮用户总结一篇文章,控制在100字以内。首先,我得仔细阅读文章内容,理解其主要观点。 文章主要讨论了Gartner提出的持续威胁暴露管理(CTEM)框架。自2022年提出以来,很多网络安全厂商开始将其产品化,但导致市场定义不一致。作者认为CTEM不是一个单一的产品,而是一个需要多平台协作的运营纪律。 接下来,文章详细说明了CTEM需要多个平台或工具,包括持续渗透测试、漏洞管理、情报收集等。此外,强调了人工专业知识的重要性以及情报在风险管理中的作用。 最后,文章指出Flashpoint如何通过整合威胁情报和漏洞管理来帮助组织构建有效的CTEM计划。 总结时要抓住关键点:CTEM不是单一产品,而是多平台协作的运营纪律;强调人工和情报的重要性;以及Flashpoint的作用。控制在100字以内,确保简洁明了。 </think> 持续威胁暴露管理(CTEM)并非单一产品,而是需整合多平台与工具的运营体系。企业通常需结合漏洞扫描、渗透测试、威胁情报等技术,并依赖人工 expertise 实现有效风险管理和响应。 2026-1-6 17:32:13 Author: flashpoint.io(查看原文) 阅读量:3 收藏

Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) is Not a Product

Since Gartner’s introduction of CTEM as a framework in 2022, cybersecurity vendors have engaged in a rapid “productization” race. This has led to inconsistent market definitions, with a variety of vendors from vulnerability scanners to Attack Surface Management (ASM) providers now claiming to be an “exposure management” solution.

The current approach to productizing CTEM is flawed. There is no such thing as a single “exposure management platform.” The enterprise reality is that most enterprises buy three or more products just to approximate what CTEM promises in theory. Even with these technologies, organizations still require heavy lifting with people, process, and custom integrations to actually make it work.

The Exposure Stack: When One Platform Becomes Three (or More)

A functional CTEM approach typically requires multiple platforms or tools, including: 

  • Continuous Penetration/Exploitation Testing & Attack Path Analysis for continuous pentesting, attack path validation, and hands-on exposure validation.
  • Vulnerability and Exposure Management for vulnerability scanning, exposure scoring, and asset risk views.
  • Intelligence for deep, curated vulnerability, compromised credentials, card fraud, and other forms of intelligence that goes far beyond the scope of technology-based “management platforms”.

In some cases, organizations may also use an ASM vendor for shadow IT discovery, a CMDB for asset context, and ticketing integrations to drive remediation. This multi-platform model is the rule, not the exception. And that raises a hard truth: if you need three or more products, plus a dedicated team to implement CTEM, you need an intelligence-led CTEM program.

CTEM is an Operational Discipline, Not a Single Product

The narrative that CTEM can be packaged into a single product breaks down for three critical reasons:

1. CTEM is a Program, Not a Platform

You cannot buy a capability that requires full-stack asset visibility, contextualized threat actor data, real-world validation, and remediation orchestration from one tool. Each component spans a different domain of expertise and data. A vulnerability scanner, alone, cannot validate exploitability, a pentest service has a tough time scaling to daily monitoring, and generic threat intelligence feeds cannot provide critical business context.

However, CTEM requires orchestration of all these components in one operational loop. No single product delivers this comprehensively out of the box; this is why CTEM must be viewed as a continuous program, not a one-size-fits-all product.

2. Human Expertise is Irreplaceable

Vendors often advertise automation, however, key intelligence functions are still powered by and reliant on human analysis. Even with best-in-class AI tools in place, security teams are depending on human insights for:

  • Triaging noisy CVE lists
  • Cross-referencing exposure data with asset inventories
  • Manually validating if risks are real
  • Prioritizing based on threat intelligence and internal context
  • Writing custom logic and integrations to bridge platforms together

In other words, exposure management today still relies on human insights and expertise. So while vendors advertise “automation and intelligence,” what they’re really delivering is a starting point. Ultimately, AI is a force multiplier for threat analysts, not a replacement.

3. Risk Without Intelligence Is Just Data

Most platforms treat exposure like a math problem. But real risk isn’t just CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) scores or asset counts, it requires answering critical, intelligence-based questions:

  1. How likely is this vulnerability to be exploited, and what’s the impact if it is?
  2. How likely is this misconfiguration to be exploited, and what is its impact?
  3. How likely is this compromised credential to be used by a threat actor, and what is the potential impact?

These answers require intelligence, not just data. Best-in-class intelligence provides security teams with confirmed exploit activity in the wild, context around attacker usage in APT (Advanced Persistent Threat) campaigns, and detailed metadata for prioritization where CVSS fails. That is why Flashpoint intelligence is leveraged by over 800 organizations as the operational core of exposure management, turning exposure data into defensible decisions.

CTEM Productization vs. CTEM Reality

If your risk strategy requires continuous penetration and exploit testing, vulnerability management, threat intelligence, and manual prioritization and validation, you’re not buying CTEM; you’re building it. At Flashpoint, we’re helping organizations build CTEM the right way: driven by intelligence, and powered by integrations and AI.

The Intelligence-Led Future of Exposure Management

Flashpoint treats CTEM for what it really is, as a program that must be constructed intelligently, iteratively, and contextually.

That means:

  • Using threat and vulnerability intelligence to drive what actually gets prioritized
  • Treating scanners, ASM platforms, and pentesting as inputs, not outcomes
  • Building processes where intelligence, context, and validation inform exposure decisions, not just ticket creation
  • Investing in platform interconnectivity, not just feature checklists

Using Flashpoint’s intelligence collections, organizations can achieve intelligence-led exposure management, with threat and vulnerability intelligence working together to provide context and actionable insights in a continuous, prioritized loop. This empowers security teams to build and scale their own CTEM programs, which is the only realistic approach in a cybersecurity landscape where no single platform can do it all.

Achieve Elite Operation Control Over Your CTEM Program Using Flashpoint

If you’re evaluating exposure management tools, ask yourself:

  • What happens when we find a critical vulnerability and how do we know it matters?
  • Can this platform correlate attacker behavior with our asset landscape?
  • Does it validate risk or just report it?
  • How many other tools will we need to buy just to complete the picture?

The answers may surprise you. At Flashpoint, we’re helping organizations build CTEM the right way, driven by intelligence, powered by integration, and grounded in reality. Request a demo today and see how best-in-class intelligence is the key to achieving an effective CTEM program.


文章来源: https://flashpoint.io/blog/why-ctem-must-be-intelligence-led-program/
如有侵权请联系:admin#unsafe.sh