The Volume Problem
Security teams are inundated with vulnerabilities. Between scanners, penetration tests, and bug bounty programs, the list of issues grows faster than most organizations can address. And while “just fix everything” sounds heroic in theory, it’s unrealistic in practice; especially for large organizations with sprawling environments and limited remediation bandwidth.
This reality makes prioritization essential. The objective is to reduce the most significant risk in the least amount of time. But how teams approach that goal varies widely, and not all methods are equally effective. Overly simplistic models can mislead efforts, diverting valuable resources toward issues that may not pose a meaningful threat.
To make real progress, organizations need a prioritization strategy that accounts for more than just severity scores. One that reflects both technical and business realities – and keeps pace with a dynamic threat landscape.
The Flawed Simplicity of CVSS-Only Approaches
For many organizations, vulnerability prioritization begins – and ends – with the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS). It’s a convenient starting point: standardized, widely adopted, and built into most scanning tools. But while CVSS helps categorize severity, it’s not a risk score.
CVSS ratings don’t consider whether a vulnerability is actually being exploited in the wild. They don’t reflect how critical the affected asset is to business operations. And they don’t account for how difficult remediation might be in a given environment. In short, CVSS provides a measure of theoretical impact under idealized conditions, but that’s not a practical roadmap for action.
Relying solely on CVSS often leads to noisy queues filled with “critical” issues that aren’t exploitable, while real threats slip through the cracks. It’s a one-size-fits-all approach in a world that demands nuance.
To prioritize effectively, security teams need to bring additional context into the equation.
Context Matters
To move beyond surface-level severity, many organizations are turning to contextual risk scoring. This approach enriches vulnerability data with factors specific to the organization, such as asset criticality, business function, exposure level, and internal connectivity.
A vulnerability on a test server might not warrant immediate attention. That same vulnerability on a production-facing application tied to customer data? A very different story. Context transforms generic findings into meaningful insights by aligning technical issues with operational impact.
This shift allows teams to prioritize vulnerabilities not just by how dangerous they are in theory, but by how much risk they pose in practice. It also helps bridge the gap between security and the business by tying remediation decisions to the protection of key assets and services.
In other words: CVSS provides a baseline; context gives it meaning.
The Role of Exploit Intelligence
While context sharpens the picture internally, threat intelligence adds a critical external dimension: understanding which vulnerabilities are actively being exploited. Not all vulnerabilities are equal in the eyes of attackers. Some are widely weaponized within hours of disclosure; others may never be targeted at all.
Exploit intelligence provides a critical lens for prioritizing vulnerabilities, not just by what can be exploited, but by what is or likely will be.
At one end of the spectrum are known, in-the-wild exploits. Resources like CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog help security teams pinpoint issues actively targeted by threat actors. These vulnerabilities represent immediate, proven risk and often require the fastest response.
On the predictive side, frameworks like the Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS) assess the likelihood that a vulnerability will be exploited in the near future, even if no public exploitation has occurred yet. This adds an important dimension for anticipating risk before it materializes.
Together, these signals help security teams stay ahead of attackers, not just by responding to today’s threats, but by preparing for tomorrow’s. Exploit intelligence, both reactive and predictive, adds vital depth to prioritization strategies grounded in real-world behavior.
A Unified Approach
Each signal – CVSS, business context, exploit intelligence – offers a valuable perspective. But the real power comes from combining them. An effective prioritization strategy draws from multiple data points to create a fuller, more actionable picture of risk.
This doesn’t mean layering on complexity for its own sake. It means designing a system that elevates the right issues by weighing what’s exploitable, what’s exposed, and what’s important to the business. When these elements are considered together, prioritization shifts from a ranking exercise to a decision-making framework.
For example, a vulnerability with a high CVSS score, active exploitation in the wild, and presence on a business-critical system clearly demands urgent attention. By contrast, a similar vulnerability on an isolated, low-value asset can safely wait without compromising the organization’s risk posture.
Prioritization Is a Strategy, Not a Score
Vulnerability management isn’t a numbers game, it’s a risk management discipline. Relying on a single metric or static threshold is no longer sufficient in today’s threat environment. Attackers are adaptive. Environments are dynamic. And risk is inherently contextual.
Effective prioritization requires a shift in mindset. It’s not about reacting to every high score or new scan result. It’s about applying consistent, defensible logic to determine what gets fixed, when, and why. That means integrating multiple signals, understanding business impact, and staying attuned to external threats, all within a process that supports timely, coordinated action.
Security teams that treat prioritization as a strategic function and not just a technical task are better positioned to reduce real risk, improve remediation velocity, and focus resources where they matter most.
In the end, the goal isn’t to fix everything. It’s to fix the right things first.
About the Author
Omer Tal is a Security Researcher in the CTO Office at Seemplicity. Omer has spent the last ten years deep in the world of cybersecurity research. He’s been part of teams at startups like Argus, VisibleRisk, and BitSight. Now, he’s at Seemplicity, diving into the nuts and bolts of vulnerability prioritization and remediation. Omer Tal can be reached online at linkedin.com/in/the-omertal and at our company website https://www.seemplicity.com/
