Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

7/30/2009
04:09 PM
George V. Hulme
George V. Hulme
Commentary
50%
50%

Corporate Patch Management Lags In Maturity

If one of the most important disciplines necessary for keeping systems secure is a systematic vulnerability management program, why have so few organizations reached a decent level of maturity in their patch management efforts?

If one of the most important disciplines necessary for keeping systems secure is a systematic vulnerability management program, why have so few organizations reached a decent level of maturity in their patch management efforts?According to data released this week by security research firm Securosis, 70 percent (out of 100 respondents) don't current measure how well, or efficiently, they roll out their software patch updates. In fact, 40 percent of respondents to Securosis' survey said they either have an informal patch process, or no patch management process in place at all.

The notion that 40 percent of companies aren't taking a formal approach to patching is scary in itself. But the news is actually worse that that -- the survey isn't based on a broad sample of organizations with varying degrees of IT maturity. No. Unfortunately, the survey was garnered by reaching out to companies engaged in security metrics and patch management groups -- so the survey is actually biased toward the more progressive companies, one could presume.

The survey results stem from Project Quant, an open initiative led by Securosis and Microsoft, that aims to understand the underlying costs associated with patch management and try to improve processes. Not surprisingly, participating organizations seem further along in their efforts to patch workstations and server operating systems -- but lag in keeping applications up to date. Unfortunately, it's the application layer that is under greatest attack.

In an effort to ease organization's patch burden, Project Quant has been working on a superset "process framework" that should encompass most patching activities within any organization, regardless of the systems they have in place. The framework consists of ten phases and forty steps. Because patching is often labor intensive, a substantial portion of the model is geared toward those types of detailed patching activities.

Patch management and the associated toolsets are relatively mature. That's why these results are so surprising, to me. Last fall, InformationWeek ran a feature, Vulnerability Management That Works that discussed how vulnerability management must be aligned with business values to succeed.

Securosis' Project Quant is just getting underway, and the survey results are already interesting. In the full report [PDF], there are also very detailed worksheets for measuring your organization's patch management effectiveness. It'll be a worthwhile exercise to go through, and most likely an eye-opener.

If you're interested in mobile security, technology, and business updates, consider following my Twitter account.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Look Beyond the 'Big 5' in Cyberattacks
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/25/2020
Why Vulnerable Code Is Shipped Knowingly
Chris Eng, Chief Research Officer, Veracode,  11/30/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: I think the boss is bing watching '70s TV shows again!
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-5423
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-02
CAPI (Cloud Controller) versions prior to 1.101.0 are vulnerable to a denial-of-service attack in which an unauthenticated malicious attacker can send specially-crafted YAML files to certain endpoints, causing the YAML parser to consume excessive CPU and RAM.
CVE-2020-29454
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-02
Editors/LogViewerController.cs in Umbraco through 8.9.1 allows a user to visit a logviewer endpoint even if they lack Applications.Settings access.
CVE-2020-7199
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-02
A security vulnerability has been identified in the HPE Edgeline Infrastructure Manager, also known as HPE Edgeline Infrastructure Management Software. The vulnerability could be remotely exploited to bypass remote authentication leading to execution of arbitrary commands, gaining privileged access,...
CVE-2020-14260
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-02
HCL Domino is susceptible to a Buffer Overflow vulnerability in DXL due to improper validation of user input. A successful exploit could enable an attacker to crash Domino or execute attacker-controlled code on the server system.
CVE-2020-14305
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-02
An out-of-bounds memory write flaw was found in how the Linux kernel’s Voice Over IP H.323 connection tracking functionality handled connections on ipv6 port 1720. This flaw allows an unauthenticated remote user to crash the system, causing a denial of service. The highest threat ...