Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management has a few things that need to be enhanced. First, there is the issue of superseded patches. Superseded means if we miss the current month patch, for example, if we miss the January patch to deploy on a particular server, Microsoft includes January changes in the second month security patch, and then the second month security patch includes all things in March. For example, if we miss two month patches and we directly deploy the March month security patch on a system, the other two patches, such as January and February, will be closed. Superseded means these patches are not deployed on a system, but after the latest one, which we already deployed, the older one does not need to be installed or deployed on a system. Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management takes a report of each and every vulnerability and shows that the January month patch was not deployed on a system and the February month patch was not deployed on a system. However, that is not a proper scanning method. If we have already deployed the latest patch that includes the older security things or older security parameters and the latest parameters, when we deploy that latest patch, why does Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management show the older patches also in potential vulnerabilities? That is a main factor that should be improved from Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management. Second, the remedies provided by Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management are sometimes not useful most of the time. In that case, we need to troubleshoot or find out the remedies by ourselves. The remedies will also be something that needs to be improved in the system or in the application.
When a customer does not have control over vulnerabilities or architecture and needs a solution that automates this function for the company, it can be difficult to identify the vulnerabilities. Because the case study is of the business model, I think identifying different vulnerabilities is not easy as companies need to be prepared to make decisions in time regarding what affects the business. I focus on areas that could be improved with Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management.
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, CrowdStrike, Tenable and others in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM). Updated: February 2026.
Continuous Threat Exposure Management enhances cybersecurity by continuously identifying, assessing, and remedying vulnerabilities to protect against evolving threats. It integrates seamlessly into an organization’s existing infrastructure, providing ongoing security improvements.CTEM proactively monitors potential threats and facilitates swift responses, reducing the risk of breaches. It allows organizations to prioritize threats based on severity and impact, thereby optimizing resource...
Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management has a few things that need to be enhanced. First, there is the issue of superseded patches. Superseded means if we miss the current month patch, for example, if we miss the January patch to deploy on a particular server, Microsoft includes January changes in the second month security patch, and then the second month security patch includes all things in March. For example, if we miss two month patches and we directly deploy the March month security patch on a system, the other two patches, such as January and February, will be closed. Superseded means these patches are not deployed on a system, but after the latest one, which we already deployed, the older one does not need to be installed or deployed on a system. Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management takes a report of each and every vulnerability and shows that the January month patch was not deployed on a system and the February month patch was not deployed on a system. However, that is not a proper scanning method. If we have already deployed the latest patch that includes the older security things or older security parameters and the latest parameters, when we deploy that latest patch, why does Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management show the older patches also in potential vulnerabilities? That is a main factor that should be improved from Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management. Second, the remedies provided by Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management are sometimes not useful most of the time. In that case, we need to troubleshoot or find out the remedies by ourselves. The remedies will also be something that needs to be improved in the system or in the application.
When a customer does not have control over vulnerabilities or architecture and needs a solution that automates this function for the company, it can be difficult to identify the vulnerabilities. Because the case study is of the business model, I think identifying different vulnerabilities is not easy as companies need to be prepared to make decisions in time regarding what affects the business. I focus on areas that could be improved with Qualys Enterprise TruRisk Management.