News, stories and insights from the team at trackd
The problem of false positives in vulnerability management can largely be attributed to the use of CPE (Common Platform Enumeration) data in the correlation process, a critical first step in vulnerability management.
Today, those in vulnerability management often create development environments (aka sandboxes) to test whether or not new patches will cause disruptions on their networks…just like they’ve been doing for 3 decades. Which leads to only
…organizations deploying End of Life software were 3.7 times more likely to suffer a claim in 2022
The psychological source of this particular patch failure, of course, is the omnipresent fear that applying patches will result in a service disruption that will, at a minimum, make for a miserable few hours for
Patch management is not just a best practice; it is an essential aspect of MSP operations. Failing to regularly patch systems and applications can leave your clients vulnerable to cyberattacks, data breaches, and system failures.
Leaving vulnerabilities unpatched can expose organizations to significant risks. Attackers actively search for known vulnerabilities to exploit, and exploiting unpatched vulnerabilities is a common technique. Such attacks can result in data breaches, financial losses, reputational
In this blog series, we’ll look at some of the more mundane – albeit common and operationally-significant – reasons patches fail.
The only thing better than learning from your own mistakes is learning from the mistakes of others. At trackd, we have come up with a radically simple but elegant solution to help organizations differentiate between
At trackd, our free users are essential to our business plan; we literally can’t deliver the unique solution we’ve designed without them.
It’s often paid lip service to (or worse, intentionally neglected), and rarely appreciated, but there’s an operational cost to be paid for security. Security controls create inefficiencies, and those security measures can also introduce operational
The problem of false positives in vulnerability management can largely be attributed to the use of CPE (Common Platform Enumeration) data in the correlation process, a critical first step in vulnerability management.
Today, those in vulnerability management often create development environments (aka sandboxes) to test whether or not new patches will cause disruptions on their networks…just like they’ve been doing for 3 decades. Which leads to only one conclusion: ARPA-H is funding an effort to build a faster horse.
…organizations deploying End of Life software were 3.7 times more likely to suffer a claim in 2022
The psychological source of this particular patch failure, of course, is the omnipresent fear that applying patches will result in a service disruption that will, at a minimum, make for a miserable few hours for IT practitioners, and could result in more serious repercussions. trackd was founded to counter exactly this rational, but largely anachronistic, fear.
Patch management is not just a best practice; it is an essential aspect of MSP operations. Failing to regularly patch systems and applications can leave your clients vulnerable to cyberattacks, data breaches, and system failures.
Leaving vulnerabilities unpatched can expose organizations to significant risks. Attackers actively search for known vulnerabilities to exploit, and exploiting unpatched vulnerabilities is a common technique. Such attacks can result in data breaches, financial losses, reputational damage, and legal liabilities.
In this blog series, we’ll look at some of the more mundane – albeit common and operationally-significant – reasons patches fail.
The only thing better than learning from your own mistakes is learning from the mistakes of others. At trackd, we have come up with a radically simple but elegant solution to help organizations differentiate between the 98% of patches that are necessary and safe, and the 2% that will have your clients calling you on the weekends.
At trackd, our free users are essential to our business plan; we literally can’t deliver the unique solution we’ve designed without them.
It’s often paid lip service to (or worse, intentionally neglected), and rarely appreciated, but there’s an operational cost to be paid for security. Security controls create inefficiencies, and those security measures can also introduce operational risk.
Copyright © 2022-2024 trackd, inc.
All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2022-2024 trackd, inc.
All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2022-2024 trackd, inc.
All rights reserved.
