Full Report
Rich Mogull (who’s stuff I really quite dig) has launched an ‘Open Patch Management Survey’ via the SecurityMetrics blog. Its an interesting idea, and they plan to release both their analysis *and* the raw data, which might be really insightful for our VMS stuff. Corporations can take the SurveyMonkey survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=SjehgbiAl3mR_2b1gauMibQw_3d_3d, and there’s some nice material already available at http://securosis.com/projectquant. Here’s the rest of Rich’s message (pls forgive the cross-post): Our goal here is to gain an understanding of what people are really doing with regards to patch management, to better align the metrics model with real practices. We’re doing something different with this survey. All the results will be made public. We don’t mean the summary results, but the raw data (minus any private or identifiable information that could reveal the source person or organization). Once we hit 100 responses we will release the data in spreadsheet formats. Then, either every week or for every 100 additional responses, we will release updated data. We don’t plan on closing this for quite some time, but as with most surveys we expect an initial rush of responses and want to get the data out there quickly. As with all our material, the results will be licensed under Creative Commons.
Analysis Summary
Based on the provided context, the article is primarily an announcement about an **Open Patch Management Survey** designed to collect data on real-world patch management practices. Therefore, the direct, actionable, technical security recommendations derived from *this specific article* are limited.
The primary security guidance derived relates to **participating in metrics collection** to improve future best practices and the **strategic importance of patch management itself.**
# Best Practices: Patch Management Data Collection and Process Improvement
## Overview
These practices emphasize utilizing community-driven data (such as the open survey mentioned) to refine and align internal patch management processes with current industry realities and to foster transparency in security metrics.
## Key Recommendations
### Immediate Actions
1. **Participate in Industry Benchmarking:** Immediately survey your organization's current patch management practices using the provided open survey mechanism to contribute to baseline data collection.
2. **Utilize Registration Codes:** When completing external surveys related to security practices (like the one referenced), utilize specified tracking codes (e.g., "SECURITYMETRICS") to ensure accurate channel attribution for future analysis.
### Short-term Improvements (1-3 months)
1. **Begin Internal Metrics Review:** Compare initial findings from the public data release against your organization's current patch deployment and vulnerability response times.
2. **Identify Discrepancy Areas:** Document specific areas where internal patch management processes significantly deviate from the patterns observed in the initial raw data release.
### Long-term Strategy (3+ months)
1. **Establish Continuous Data Integration:** Develop a long-term strategy to routinely benchmark internal metrics against publicly available, raw security data sets to ensure ongoing process alignment.
2. **Promote Data Transparency:** If applicable, advocate internally for transparency in security metrics reporting, mirroring the public release model that allows for external scrutiny and validation of security claims.
## Implementation Guidance
### For Small Organizations
- **Prioritize Participation:** Given limited resources, focus efforts on contributing to and leveraging community data to quickly identify high-impact practices rather than developing exhaustive internal standards from scratch.
- **Simple Tracking:** Ensure basic tracking (e.g., survey completion, patch windows) is recorded formally, even if using simple spreadsheets, to facilitate future benchmarking.
### For Medium Organizations
- **Data Validation Projects:** Dedicate a small project team to download and analyze the raw, anonymized data releases as they become available every 100 responses.
- **Process Gap Analysis:** Systematically map existing patch deployment SLAs/SLOs against emerging industry benchmarks derived from the public data.
### For Large Enterprises
- **Tool Interoperability:** Ensure your Vulnerability Management System (VMS) or patch management tools can easily parse and ingest structured, publicly released data formats (e.g., spreadsheet formats).
- **Cross-Departmental Review:** Schedule formal review sessions with IT Operations and Security teams immediately following major data releases to discuss variances between stated policy and observed practice.
## Configuration Examples
*(No specific technical configuration guidance was provided in the source material related to tool setup or OS hardening; the focus was entirely on survey methodology.)*
## Compliance Alignment
- **General Vulnerability Management (VM) Frameworks:** Practices informed by robust patch management data directly support compliance requirements within standards like:
* **NIST SP 800-53:** Alignment with controls related to Configuration Management (CM) and Vulnerability Management (RA).
* **ISO/IEC 27001:** Supporting Annex A controls related to vulnerability management and system maintenance.
## Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- **Ignoring Raw Data:** Focusing only on the *summary analysis* released by others, rather than performing independent analysis on the *raw data*, which provides deeper insights into outliers and varied practices.
- **Incomplete Survey Responses:** Failing to answer optional questions in provided industry surveys, which degrades the accuracy and usefulness of the resultant community metrics model.
- **Data Stagnation:** Treating a security survey as a one-time event; security practices evolve, so continuous data collection and re-evaluation are necessary.
## Resources
- **Open Data Source:** Monitor the specified SecurityMetrics blog/Securosis link for recurring raw data releases.
- **Licensing Consideration:** Note that released material is licensed under Creative Commons, which affects how you can use or share any derived analysis.
- **Direct Contact:** Be prepared to respond to requests for direct interviews if your organization indicates openness to participation.