The CTEM Chronicles: Prioritization for Balancing the Scales
Welcome to Episode 4 of the CTEM Chronicles, Phase 3 Prioritization, the point where organizations decide what deserves attention, investment, and action during this CTEM cycle.
In a world of near infinite risks but finite resources, prioritization is critical.
Why Prioritization is the Tipping Point
Security teams often find themselves overwhelmed by scan results, audit findings, and external requirements. Trying to fix everything is impractical and often ineffective. CTEM’s 3rd Phase emphasizes focusing on exposures with the most significant business and operational impact.
Instead of reacting to technical severity alone, the shift is toward exposures that are exploitable, relevant to current threat activity, and critical to the business.
Moving from vulnerability management to exposure management means shifting focus from technical severity to business relevance and adversarial feasibility. We must evaluate not just what could go wrong, but what would matter if it did.
Core Elements of Prioritization
Let’s break down what effective prioritization looks like in a CTEM-aligned program
1. Threat Modeling as a Filter
We should be focusing on threat actions, what adversaries do, not just who they are. This provides a structured lens to rank threats by relevance and impact.
- Prioritize threats that are actively exploited or mapped in realistic attack paths.
- Use cases: Credential abuse, phishing entry points, lateral movement opportunities.
2. Asset Criticality Mapping
Rather than addressing all assets equally, prioritize based on the business function, data sensitivity, and exposure profile of each asset in the scope for this cycle.
3. Contextual Scoring
Static CVSS scores often leave out important context. Prioritization needs dynamic, multi-input scoring models:
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS) to assess likelihood of exploitation.
- Threat intelligence to determine active campaigns and TTPs in play.
- Control effectiveness data: are our existing controls covering the exposure, or failing silently?
[CTA]
4. Safeguard Mapping and Coverage Analysis
Once threats and assets are ranked, map your existing safeguards to these threats. Where are the gaps? Are compensating controls truly compensating?
This step shifts prioritization from abstract risk to concrete remediation paths which will be tested in the next phase.
The Output: An Exposure Narrative
When executed correctly, prioritization produces business-aligned exposure narratives:
- What exposures exist?
- Which ones have credible paths to critical systems?
- What is actively being exploited?
- Where are we unprotected?
- What’s the cost (or consequence) of not acting?
This narrative is what enables alignment with leadership, funding for remediation, and support from cross-functional teams.
From Reactive to Risk-Based
Evolve recommends for organizations to get proactive by narrowing focus on exposures that:
- Are easily discoverable by attackers
- Sit close to critical data or systems
- Lack meaningful protective controls
- Are part of known, successful attack paths
Organizations that succeed here often group exposures by threat vector or business initiative (e.g., phishing-resistance, exposed RDP, insecure AI workflows).
CTEM prioritization is more than a spreadsheet sort. The diagram below shows how different inputs feed into a structured path toward meaningful remediation:
.avif)
Pitfalls to Avoid
- Fixation on CVSS: It’s a useful signal, but not a decision-making tool by itself.
- Trying to Boil the Ocean: Prioritize by campaign, asset group, or threat vector. Precision is key, and keeping focused on this cycle’s scope is important.
- Operating in Silos: Include IT, compliance, and business owners. CTEM prioritization is a team sport.
The table below contrasts traditional vulnerability management with CTEM’s prioritization mindset:
Final Thought: Prioritization is Empowerment
Phase 3 of CTEM is focused on determining what exposures and attack paths are worth spending resources to validate and fix. By focusing on exposures that pose the greatest threat to what matters most, organizations can finally get off the hamster wheel of reactive patching and move toward intelligent, sustainable defense.
In Phase 4, we’ll explore Validation where we will test our assumptions before moving to remediate.
