Cybersecurity professionals are all too familiar with the myriad acronyms that saturate the industry landscape. Among the latest terms gaining traction is CTEM, an abbreviation for Continuous Threat Exposure Management. This article delves into the complexities and the unforeseen challenges organizations face as they seek to mature their CTEM programs. Though the concept originated with a publication in July 2022, many organizations are now implementing strategies that may reveal unexpected hurdles along the way.

Understanding Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)

To clarify, Continuous Threat Exposure Management is not a standalone technology and cannot be acquired as a single tool from a vendor. Rather, it encompasses a structured five-stage framework designed to assist organizations in monitoring their vulnerability landscape, evaluating risk, and optimizing their analysis and remediation processes. A report from Gartner® emphasizes that the goal of CTEM is to produce a unified, actionable security posture that can be easily grasped by business executives and executed by architecture teams.

For more insights, download our whitepaper, Establishing a Modern Exposure Management Program, which covers critical vulnerabilities, types of exposures affecting security posture, and foundational elements of an adaptive exposure management program.

Goals of CTEM

The Gartner report highlights that conventional vulnerability assessments often produce non-actionable reports that leave organizations with growing attack surfaces. CTEM aims to combat this trend by fostering a consistent security posture that is both actionable and understandable for executives while actionable for architectural teams. Effective CTEM implementation can lead to proactive identification and remediation of vulnerabilities before adversaries can exploit them.

Addressing Implementation Challenges

While launching a CTEM program is commendable, it brings forth a series of challenges that must be navigated for successful execution. Recognizing potential challenges at the outset can alleviate future frustrations.

Aligning Security and Non-Security Teams

One of the primary obstacles is achieving synchronization between security teams and departments such as IT, infrastructure, and DevOps. This communication gap often leads to misunderstandings surrounding ownership and responsibility, which can hinder the CTEM initiative. When team members are preoccupied with urgent tasks, they may regard CTEM as just another added responsibility, thus disengaging from its strategic significance.

To address this issue, it is crucial to engage stakeholders from non-security teams early in the process. Involving them in discussions about CTEM objectives fosters a shared understanding of goals and buy-in. Regular updates on cybersecurity incidents can also heighten their awareness of the business implications of their roles.

Establishing a Holistic Perspective

A robust CTEM program encompasses multiple domains, including cloud security, Active Directory, software vulnerabilities, and network security. Each domain operates in its silo, which complicates the integration needed for a comprehensive overview. Without an understanding of how different areas interrelate, organizations risk gaps in their threat assessments, leaving vulnerabilities unchecked.

Identifying a single point of accountability can resolve this issue. Appointing a dedicated individual to oversee the integration of all domains can help ensure that the big picture is encompassed, even if they lack granular knowledge of each area.

Managing Alert Fatigue

Another challenge arises from the volume of alerts generated by the various tools used across CTEM domains. While the objective is to consolidate information, the sheer quantity of notifications can create a cacophony of noise that obscures actionable insights.

To mitigate alert fatigue, organizations should accept the reality that not every issue can be tackled simultaneously. By prioritizing vulnerabilities that pose the greatest risk of exploitation and employing a “crawl, walk, run” approach, organizations can incrementally expand their focus as their programs evolve.

Conclusion

According to Gartner, organizations committed to a continuous exposure management program will be three times less likely to experience a breach by 2026. By addressing potential challenges proactively, organizations can streamline their paths to effective CTEM implementation.

Note: This article was composed by Shay Siksik, VP Customer Experience at XM Cyber.