Adversarial Exposure Validation
Simulate adversarial attacks to identify exploitable vulnerabilities and prioritize the most critical threats for remediation.
What is Adversarial Exposure Validation?
There just aren't enough hours in the day to address every vulnerability, misconfiguration, and security control coverage gap. Adversarial Exposure Validation—a core component of Exposure Management—provides the opportunity to narrow your findings to what attackers can see by verifying the exploitability and impact of exposures in a persistent and reliable way.
The core role of validation is to reduce the exposures to only those that are exploitable while also improving your teams’ ability to prioritize issues that will most significantly impact your risk reduction efforts.
Reasons to Validate Your Exposures:
- Separate theoretical risks from actionable ones
- Ensure your security controls are prepared for real world attacks
- Streamline targeted, non-disruptive remediation
Benefits of Adversarial Exposure Validation
By 2026, organizations that prioritize their security investments based on a CTEM program will be three times less likely to suffer a breach.
Gartner, "How to Manage Cybersecurity Threats, Not Episodes", August 21, 2023
More Attack Surface, More Exposure
No longer confined to port and protocol, each connected device or log-in credential is now a potential attacker’s entry point. Migration to the cloud, more remote workers and devices, and a steady stream of new applications offer adversaries many new ways to infiltrate systems.
As you build more complex systems, your attack surface grows too, creating an overwhelming volume of exposures that security teams are incapable of sifting through. At the same time, our time to respond to incidents is shrinking.
Legacy Prioritization Is Not Enough
Scoring vulnerabilities was once a clear way to fix the biggest risk first. CVSS scores and EPSS scores provide rankings but do not consider intelligence from other toolsets or context from critical business units. In addition, many vulnerabilities may be theoretical due to deployed compensating controls, or lack of context.
While vulnerability scoring does provide some prioritization, it does not shorten the length of your team’s to-do list. Essentially, traditional approaches are flawed and fail to consider the organization’s context.
Difficulty in Validating Security Control Effectivenes
Even when vulnerabilities are identified and prioritized, organizations often struggle to validate whether their security controls are effective in mitigating those threats. Many defenses, such as firewalls or endpoint security solutions, may seem sufficient but can fail when faced with real-world attack scenarios.
Without adversarial exposure validation, security teams are left uncertain about whether their current defenses can hold up against actual adversaries and which areas to work on first. This uncertainty increases the risk of undetected, exploitable weaknesses and reduces the effectiveness of remediation efforts.
How to Get Started
As the leading adversarial exposure validation solution, Picus Security Validation Platform is unmatched in enabling an organization to focus on and remediate the exposures posing the greatest risk.
With leading integrations and existing vulnerability management systems we offer the broadest exposure validation through the use of advanced technologies such as Breach and Attack Simulation, Automated Penetration Testing, and Red Teaming. Our simulation insights and remediation guidance through Picus Mitigation Library empower security teams to take immediateaction against validated exposures.
Validate What Matters Most
Discover how to effectively validate and prioritize exposures within the CTEM framework, ensuring your security efforts focus on the most critical threats.
Actionable insights.
Smooth mobilization.
Mobilization is the final stage of an Exposure Management program, where remediation teams are mobilized to address the exposures that have been effectively validated.
Adversarial Exposure Validation technologies are expected to provide ready-to-apply mitigation suggestions from various vendors of your choice, helping to eliminate the potentially disruptive process of manual patching.
By implementing these suggestions, organizations can quickly remove the conditions necessary for an adversary to carry out a successful attack, thereby reducing the operational burden on security teams.
Explore Other Use Cases
How the Picus Platform helps you address your cybersecurity challenges.
Breach and Attack
Simulation
Simulate attacks to measure and optimize security controls.
Automated Penetration
Testing
Stay on top of exposures while alleviating manual testing requirements.
Resources
Discover Our Latest News and Content
Reports
Gartner Report: How to Grow Vulnerability Management Into Exposure Management
Article
Adversarial Exposure Validation Tools
Article
Cyber Risk Management for CISOs: A Quick Overview
Article
The Role of Adversarial Exposure Validation in CTEM
Article
From Exposure Assessment to Management: The Power of Validation in CTEM
Article
Uncovering Critical Defensive Gaps with Automated Penetration Testing Software
Reports
2024 Gartner® Hype Cycle™ for Security Operations
Article
Blue Report 2024 Reveals 40% of Environments Exposed to Full Take Over
Article
Choosing Which Vulnerabilities to Patch
See the
Picus Security Validation Platform
Request a Demo
Submit a request and we'll share answers to your top security validation and exposure management questions.
Get Threat-ready
Simulate real-world cyber threats in minutes and see a holistic view of your security effectiveness.
Frequently Asked Questions
Breach and Attack Simulation and penetration testing are both approaches to security validation.
Penetration testing, which is most commonly performed by human ethical hackers, is focused on discovering and exploiting vulnerabilities in systems, networks and applications. BAS, on the other hand, is fully automated and used to simulate specific threats such as ransomware and test the effectiveness of security controls against them.
Picus Security’s approach to attack simulation means that simulating threats is practically risk-free.
Typically, simulations rely on agents deployed on specific endpoints in your environment. They allow for a wide range of attack techniques to be simulated. The attack simulations are completely safe and do not target and alter production systems.
Security control validation describes the process of testing and optimizing cyber security controls. With security control validation, security teams can measure the effectiveness of prevention and detection controls and understand if they provide coverage against the latest cyber threats. Proactive identification of threat coverage and visibility gaps enables security teams to address exposures before attackers can exploit them.
Ever-evolving attack techniques and constant changes in IT environments mean security control validation is essential to quantify cyber risk and optimize threat readiness. Only by validating controls consistently can security teams keep pace with the latest threats and discover gaps before attackers do.
In order to keep pace with the evolving threat landscape and changes in IT, security control validation should be performed regularly. At a minimum, validation should be performed weekly as well as in response to new emerging threats and configuration changes to prevention and detection security controls.
Traditional security assessments such as vulnerability scanning and penetration testing are focused on the discovery of vulnerabilities and misconfigurations in networks, systems and applications. The purpose of security control validation assessments is not to Identify vulnerabilities but instead validate the effectiveness of security controls to prevent and detect cyber attacks.
To comply with the latest information and data security regulations and standards, organizations must proactively test the effectiveness of security controls and processes. In Europe, The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) states that organizations should have a process for regularly testing, assessing and evaluating the effectiveness of technical and organizational measures. ISO-27001, the PCI DSS, and frameworks such as NIST 800-53 also have similar requirements.
To reduce cyber risk, security teams should validate as many network and endpoint security controls as possible. Many organizations start by validating the ability of prevention controls such as firewalls, intrusion prevention systems, and antivirus to block network infiltration and email threats. Validation of EDR and SIEM provides additional assurance by assessing detection capabilities, such as whether detection rules reliably generate alerts when specific adversary behaviors are identified.