Security | Threat Detection | Cyberattacks | DevSecOps | Compliance

The nature of cybersecurity risk has evolved dramatically over time, challenging traditional approaches to security. Historically, organizations have concentrated their efforts on fortifying assets they directly own, assuming that this strategy provides sufficient protection. Unfortunately, this narrow focus fails to acknowledge a fundamental truth: attackers operate without regard for ownership boundaries.

At a time when the cloud estate of organizations is expanding faster than ever, the attack surface is becoming harder to monitor. This blog post aims to demystify attack surface discovery. We’ll explore what it involves, why it’s important, and how it fits into securing your digital assets. By the end, you’ll understand why a nuanced approach to attack surface discovery isn’t just beneficial; it’s essential for staying a step ahead against today’s sophisticated threats.

Attack surface management (ASM) has taken center stage in cybersecurity discussions in recent years. The key factor that sets ASM apart from traditional vulnerability management is its more informed and intelligent response to threats – “the attacker’s point of view” so to speak. What makes this possible is security validation. That’s what we focus on in this article.

There is an important concept that runs through our product that I call explainability. I use the term a lot with our product and engineering teams to emphasize our data-first approach and our will to stand behind our data. The term is, well, self-explanatory, but I want to dig into it and show how it helps security professionals. To me, I don’t know any other way of building a product that customers will truly trust other than to explain how conclusions and rankings were determined.

Threat Intelligence is an important capability that many SOCs use to improve their security posture. Understanding what threat actors are targeting and how, can aid in everything from threat hunting to incident response. However, organizations often struggle with how to operationalize threat intelligence data they receive in order to actually accomplish this.

When it comes to cybersecurity and online protection, many regional ISP and telco providers are very late to the party to defend against malicious actors, like in the case of Russian APT groups. The COVID-19 crisis outlined the importance of the internet and computers. However, it also emphasized the importance of online security. One report showed that over 7.9 billion records had been exposed by data breaches from January to September of 2019.

Zero-day vulnerabilities require an emergency response, disrupting proactive security initiatives and placing additional pressure on security teams. Despite not being the primary focus of their daily responsibilities, zero-days, especially those exploited in the wild, capture significant media attention. This often results in managers, executives, and even board members seeking immediate information about the company’s exposure to the latest threats.

We live in a time where the integrity and security of an organization’s digital infrastructure are essential in earning customer confidence and trust. This trust, however, is increasingly under siege due to a surge in cyberattacks exploiting overlooked or inadequately managed internet-facing assets. Organizations’ growing online presence are under an ever-increasing risk of cyber threats.

“Our report reflects CyCognito’s innovative approach to asset discovery and vulnerability assessment taken, while maintaining a solid foundation in the mature platform space. This placement indicates not only a commitment to advanced ASM solutions but also a keen focus on evolving and adapting to the changing digital landscape rapidly.”

In cybersecurity, current approaches don’t stay current for long. Organizations that fail to adapt accordingly often discover this fact at the cost of their secure network. This is particularly true in the face of complex and increasingly unpatchable attack surfaces and a corresponding reduction in the impact of automated remediation practices. Traditional security approaches are unable to fully address these challenges.