Compliance and Vulnerabilities two different animals

vulnerability management & Compliance

We often come across those questions. are compliance programmes and vulnerability management, posture management different?

Yes and no is the answer. With compliance, we try to be guided by a framework to implement security, while vulnerability management is usually one of the process parts of any of the frameworks

So how do you join the two? easy you look for the elements that match compliance and vulnerabilities

Every compliance framework has similar steps

  • Prepare a plan/programme
  • Collect Assets and assign to users
  • Assess Assets with some form of vulnerability scan
  • Structure a set of actions for the compliance process and assign tasks/targets
  • Execute on those targets
  • measure progress towards green

What are the frameworks you might look into?

First article to focus on vulnerability management, posture management and mapping to compliance framework like CISA, NIST Cybersecurity Framework and ISO27001:2017
Framework of reference

ISO 27001

The ISO/IEC 27001:2013 standard focuses on creating an information security management system (ISMS) that protects confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information as part of the risk management process.

Under ISO 27001:2013, a vulnerability is defined as “a weakness of an asset or control that could potentially be exploited by one or more threats.” A threat is defined as any “potential cause of an unwanted incident, which may result in harm to a system or organization.” 

What Controls can we map in vulnerability management?

-Asset Management

  • Management of technology vuln (12.6.1)
  • Risk assessment controls
  • Software security issues (8.1.1)
  • Logging and monitoring (A12.4)
  • Annex A12.5 – Controls for operational software

NIST Cybersecurity Framework

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework is voluntary guidance based on existing standards, guidelines, and practices for organizations to better manage and reduce cybersecurity risk. In addition to helping organizations manage and reduce risks, it was designed to foster risk and cybersecurity management communications amongst internal and external organizational stakeholders.

https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework/framework

The framework is composed of several parts for brevity, we refer to the core elements that form the framework, for this writeup we will focus only on the main categories and subcategories, citing the individual numbers.

Identify

  • ID-RA-1 – Assets are identified
  • ID-RA 2 – Threat and vulnerabilities are identified

Protect

  • PR.IP-12 – Vuln management plan is developed and implemented
  • PR.IP-7 – Protection Processes are continuously implemented

Detect

  • DE.CM – asset are monitored at intervals
  • DE.DP-5
  • Det. Proc. Are improved
  • DE.CM-8 – Vuln Scans are performed

Respond

  • RS-MI-3 – New Vuln are mitigated, and risk accepted
  • RS-IM – Org resp activities are improved  with lessons learned

Also, another element to look for vulnerability management: https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-40/rev-3/final

CISA Vulnerability management

CISA for Vulnerability management is part 4 of the control guidance distributed by CISA and part of the CRR Resource Guide series. This document is one of 10 resource guides developed by the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cyber Security Evaluation Program (CSEP) to help organizations implement practices identified as considerations for improvement during a Cyber Resilience Review (CRR).1 The CRR is an interview-based assessment that captures an understanding and qualitative measurement of an organization’s operational resilience, specific to IT operations

  • Section 3/4 – Preparation of analysis and resolutions
  • Section 3,4,5 – Process for identification & Analysis are updated and info are kept current
  • Section 5 – Exposure to identified vuln are managed
  • Section 5 – Root Cause of vulnerabilities are addressed

What BOD Regulation Vulnerability management help

  • BOD 22-01 – Reducing the Significant Risk of Known Exploited Vulnerabilities 
  • BOD 20-01 – Develop and Publish a Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
  • BOD 19-02 – Vulnerability Remediation Requirements for Internet-Accessible Systems
  • BOD 18-02 – Securing High Value Assets

Where you can find the complete list: https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CRR_Resource_Guide-VM_0.pdf

Following a mapping link to NIST, CISA and the various controls/sections

CRR Goal and Practice [CERT-RMM Reference]NIST CSF Category/ SubcategoryVulnerability Management Resource Guide Reference
Goal 1 – Preparation for vulnerability analysis and resolution activities is conducted.
1. Has a vulnerability analysis and resolution strategy been developed? [VAR: SG1.SP2]PR.IP-12: A vulnerability management plan is developed and implemented
Section III, Step 3 
Section IV, Step 1 
2. Is there a standard set of tools and/or methods in use to identify vulnerabilities in assets? [VAR: SG1.SP2]DE.CM: The information system and assets are monitored at discrete intervals to identify cybersecurity events and verify the effectiveness of protective measures.Section III, Step 2 
Section IV, Step 1 
Goal 2 – A process for identifying and analyzing vulnerabilities is established and maintained.
1. Have sources of vulnerability information been identified? [VAR: SG2.SP1]ID.RA-2: Threat and vulnerability information is received from information sharing forums and sources
Section III, Step 2 
Section IV, Step 1 
Section IV, Step 5 
2. Is the information from these sources kept current? [VAR: SG2.SP1]DE.DP-5: Detection processes are continuously improved
ID.RA-2: Threat and vulnerability information is received from information sharing forums and sources
PR.IP-7: Protection processes are continuously improved
Section IV, Step 8 
3. Are vulnerabilities being actively discovered? [VAR: SG2.SP2]DE.CM-8: Vulnerability scans are performed
ID.RA-1: Asset vulnerabilities are identified and documented
 –
4. Are vulnerabilities categorized and prioritized? [VAR: SG2.SP3]PR.IP-12: A vulnerability management plan is developed and implementedSection V, Step 4
5. Are vulnerabilities analyzed to determine relevance to the organization? [VAR: SG2.SP3]PR.IP-12: A vulnerability management plan is developed and implementedSection V, Step 4
Section V, Step 5
Section V, Step 7
6. Is a repository used for recording information about vulnerabilities and their resolution? [VAR: SG2.SP2]ID.RA-1: Asset vulnerabilities are identified and documented
PR.IP-12: A vulnerability management plan is developed and implemented
Section IV, Step 1 
Section IV, Step 6 
Section V, Step 5 
Section V, Step 6 
Section V, Step 7 
Mapping Table

How we can help

Phoenix Security helps identify elements related to regulation and help automate and scale most of the regulation above.

Francesco is an internationally renowned public speaker, with multiple interviews in high-profile publications (eg. Forbes), and an author of numerous books and articles, who utilises his platform to evangelize the importance of Cloud security and cutting-edge technologies on a global scale.

Discuss this blog with our community on Slack

Join our AppSec Phoenix community on Slack to discuss this blog and other news with our professional security team

From our Blog

The journey of securing an organization’s application landscape varies dramatically, depending on where a company stands in its maturity. Early-stage startups with small security teams face challenges not only with vulnerabilities but also with scaling their security processes in line with their growth. On the flip side, established enterprises struggle with managing complex environments, prioritizing remediation, and dealing with vast amounts of vulnerabilities while staying ahead of sophisticated threats. For startups, the focus is clear—establish visibility and ensure core security practices are in place. Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) tools provide a straightforward, automated approach to detecting vulnerabilities and enforcing policies. These solutions help reduce risk quickly without overburdening small security teams. Mature organizations, on the other hand, are tackling a different set of problems. With the sheer number of vulnerabilities and an increasingly complicated threat landscape, enterprises need to fine-tune their approach. The goal shifts toward intelligent remediation, leveraging real-time threat intelligence and advanced risk prioritization. ASPM tools at this stage do more than just detect vulnerabilities—they provide context, enable proactive decision-making, and streamline the entire remediation process. The emergence of AI-assisted code generation has further complicated security in both environments. These tools, while speeding up development, are often responsible for introducing new vulnerabilities into applications at a faster pace than traditional methods. The challenge is clear: AI-generated code can hide flaws that are difficult to catch in the rush of innovation. Both startups and enterprises need to adjust their security posture to account for these new risks. ASPM platforms, like Phoenix Security, provide automated scanning of code before it hits production, ensuring that flaws don’t make it past the first line of defense. Meanwhile, organizations are also grappling with the backlog crisis in the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). A staggering number of CVEs remain unprocessed, leaving many businesses with limited data on which to base their patching decisions. While these delays leave companies vulnerable, Phoenix Security steps in by cross-referencing CVE data with known exploits and live threat intelligence, helping organizations stay ahead despite the lag in official vulnerability reporting. Whether just starting their security program or managing a complex infrastructure, organizations need a toolset that adapts with them. Phoenix Security enables businesses of any size to prioritize vulnerabilities based on actual risk, not just theoretical impact, helping security teams navigate the evolving threat landscape with speed and accuracy.
Francesco Cipollone
The cybersecurity world is reeling as MITRE’s funding for the CVE and NVD systems expires, disrupting the backbone of global vulnerability management. As traditional sources like the National Vulnerability Database collapse under funding cuts and submission backlogs, security teams face delays, incomplete data, and loss of automation in remediation pipelines. This isn’t just a data problem—it’s a structural crisis for application security and vulnerability correlation. In this landscape of uncertainty, Phoenix Security’s ASPM platform steps up with a code-to-cloud correlation engine that doesn’t depend on outdated data workflows. By connecting code-level insights (including tools like Semgrep) to runtime and cloud environments, Phoenix enables faster, context-aware vulnerability remediation—even as NVD and CVE pipelines deteriorate. This article dives into the implications of the CVE shutdown and how Phoenix Security is helping security and development teams transition to a resilient, correlation-first approach to cybersecurity.
Francesco Cipollone
Learn how to predict ransomware risks and vulnerability exploitation using a threat-centric approach. Explore data-driven insights, verified exploit trends, and methods for assessing the likelihood of attacks with key references to CISA KEV, EPSS, and Phoenix Security’s 4D Risk Formula.
Francesco Cipollone
Remote Code Execution flaws continue to undermine Kubernetes ingress integrity. IngressNightmare (CVE-2025-1097, CVE-2025-1098, CVE-2025-24514, CVE-2025-1974) showcases severe threat vectors in NGINX-based proxies, leading to cluster-wide exposure. ASPM, robust remediation tactics, and strong application security solutions—like Phoenix Security—mitigate these vulnerabilities before ransomware groups exploit them.
Francesco Cipollone
Remote Code Execution flaws continue to undermine Kubernetes ingress integrity. IngressNightmare (CVE-2025-1097, CVE-2025-1098, CVE-2025-24514, CVE-2025-1974) showcases severe threat vectors in NGINX-based proxies, leading to cluster-wide exposure. ASPM, robust remediation tactics, and strong application security solutions—like Phoenix Security—mitigate these vulnerabilities before ransomware groups exploit them.
Francesco Cipollone
The recent Google acquisition of Wiz for $32 billion has sent shockwaves through the cybersecurity industry, particularly in the realm of Application Security Posture Management (ASPM). This monumental deal highlights the critical importance of cloud security and the growing demand for robust ASPM solutions. While the acquisition promises potential benefits for Google Cloud users, it also raises concerns about vendor lock-in and the future of cloud-agnostic security. Explore the implications of this acquisition and discover how neutral ASPM solutions like Phoenix Security can bridge the gap in multi-cloud environments, ensuring continuous, collaborative, and comprehensive security from code to cloud.” – Find Assets/Vulns by Scanner – Detailed findings Location information Risk-based Posture Management – Risk and Risk Magnitude for Assets – Filter assets and vulnerabilities by source scanner Integrations – BurpSuite XML Import – Assessment Import API Other Improvements – Improved multi-selection in filters – New CVSS Score column in Vulnerabilities
Alfonso Eusebio
x  Powerful Protection for WordPress, from Shield Security
This Site Is Protected By
ShieldPRO