Asset & Data Management · AD-Q05

Question: Are vulnerability scanning and patch management defined with scope, cadence, and risk-based prioritization?

Objective — Why This Matters

Unpatched systems are a primary breach vector. A risk-based patch process tied to asset criticality and exposure closes windows attackers rely on.

Maturity Levels (0–5)

0 — Unaware
No routine scanning or patching; updates happen ad hoc.
1 — Ad Hoc
Infrequent scans; patching left to admins without SLA.
2 — Defined
Scanning and patch policy with scope and monthly cadence.
3 — Managed
Risk-based prioritization (exposure/criticality); SLAs enforced.
4 — Integrated
Automated rollout with staged rings; exception tracking with expiry.
5 — Optimized
Threat intelligence and KEV feeds tune urgency; rollback rehearsed.

How to Level Up

From → To Actions
0 → 1 Run baseline scans and record top issues with owners.
1 → 2 Publish policy: scope, tools, cadence, and SLAs by severity.
2 → 3 Align to asset criticality; add exposure context (internet-facing).
3 → 4 Implement staged rollouts and success metrics; track exceptions with end dates.
4 → 5 Integrate KEV/threat intel; rehearse rollback and measure mean time to patch.

People / Process / Technology Enablers

Evidence Required

Metrics / KPIs

Low-Cost / Open-Source Options (MSME)

Purpose Tool Notes
Scanning OpenVAS / Nuclei Start with authenticated scans for accuracy.
Patching WSUS/Intune Basic / apt/yum automation Use staged rings and maintenance windows.
Dashboards Metabase Age and compliance trend.

Common Pitfalls

Compliance Mapping

Standard Clauses / Notes
ISO/IEC 27001 A.8.8 (vulnerability mgmt).
NIST CSF 2.0 PR.IP-12, DE.CM-8.
CERT-In 2022 Timely remediation expectations.
NIRMATA Scoring AD-Q05 Level ≥3 requires risk-based SLAs + evidence.