Vulnerability management reporting is all about having a solid process for tracking vulnerabilities in your cloud environment, fixing them, and keeping relevant stakeholders in the loop. It's a critical part of threat and vulnerability management that helps you stay on top of risks.

Where did this come from?

This concept comes straight from the CSA Cloud Controls Matrix v4.0.10 released on 2023-09-26. You can download the full matrix here to dive deeper. The control ID for vulnerability management reporting is TVM-09 under the Threat & Vulnerability Management domain.

For specifics on implementing this in AWS, check out their vulnerability management docs.

Who should care?

• Cloud security engineers needing to operationalize vulnerability management
• DevOps teams wanting to bake security into CI/CD pipelines
• IT leaders responsible for overall cloud security posture
• Auditors assessing cloud vulnerability management practices

What is the risk?

Poor vulnerability tracking and reporting can lead to:

• Unpatched vulnerabilities being exploited by attackers
• Delays in remediating high-risk issues
• Blindspots in your cloud security posture
• Frustrated stakeholders who aren't kept informed

While this control alone can't eliminate these risks, it's an essential foundation. The better your reporting, the faster you can find and fix vulns.

What's the care factor?

For most orgs, this should be a high priority, especially if you:

• Handle sensitive data in the cloud
• Are subject to security regulations
• Have had issues with vulns in the past

However, early stage startups with simple cloud footprints can likely focus elsewhere first. Ultimately, the priority depends on your risk tolerance.

When is it relevant?

Vulnerability reporting makes sense when:

• You have production workloads in the cloud
• Security is a key concern for your org
• You have stakeholders who need status updates

It's less critical if you're just spinning up test/dev environments. Although it never hurts to instill good habits early!

What are the trade-offs?

Proper vuln reporting takes time and effort to implement well. Some potential downsides:

• Added overhead for engineering teams
• Potential false positives to triage
• Notification fatigue for stakeholders

However, these are minor compared to the security benefits. Automation can also help reduce manual toil.

How to make it happen?

1. Deploy vuln scanners across your cloud environment
2. Aggregate scan results into a central dashboard
3. Prioritize vulns based on risk (CVSS score, exploitability, etc)
4. Set SLAs for remediation based on severity
5. Fix vulns based on priority, updating tickets/tasks
6. Send status reports to stakeholders on a set cadence
7. Validate fixes with re-scans
8. Feed vuln data into quarterly metrics/KPIs

What are some gotchas?

• Make sure you have IAM permissions to scan all relevant resources (e.g. ec2:DescribeInstances)
• False positives can waste time, so tune scanners properly
• Don't rely solely on network scans, incorporate app and config scans too
• Over-notification can desensitize stakeholders, so be judicious
• Fixing vulns requires coordination with app owners, plan ahead

What are the alternatives?

For cloud-native environments, you could shift more security left and:

• Scan infrastructure-as-code templates for misconfigs
• Embed vuln checks into the CI/CD pipeline
• Use immutable, short-lived instances instead of long-running ones

These complement, not replace, traditional vuln management. Defense in depth!

Explore further

• CIS Control 7: Continuous Vulnerability Management
• AWS whitepaper on vulnerability management
• NIST SP 800-40: Guide to Enterprise Patch Management Planning
• OWASP Vulnerability Management Guide

?