Exposure Management for the Modern Attack Surface

For years, vulnerability management programs have been built on a familiar foundation: scan the network, identify CVEs, prioritize by CVSS score, remediate in order. It is a model that made sense when enterprise environments were relatively homogeneous and well-bounded. That world no longer exists for most organizations.

The convergence of IT, OT, and IoT environments has fundamentally changed the attack surface. Programmable logic controllers, building management systems, IP cameras, medical devices, and industrial sensors now sit on the same networks as servers and endpoints; often without agents, without managed credentials, and outside the reach of traditional scanners. In most organizations, they represent a significant and rapidly growing share of the total asset inventory, and attackers know it.

Traditional vulnerability scanners were designed for a managed IT world. They depend on agents or credentials to generate meaningful results, and their output is predominantly CVE-centric, which is a useful signal, but an incomplete one. With the rise of AI attacks, the time between vulnerability discovery and exploitation is significantly compressed, further limiting the effectiveness of CVE-centric data.

runZero addresses this gap with an agentless, credential-free approach to asset discovery and exposure management that spans IT, OT, and IoT in a single solution. By combining active scanning, passive analysis, and integrations with existing security and IT tools, runZero builds a continuous, high-fidelity asset inventory, then goes further, surfacing the exposures and attack paths most likely to matter to an attacker. 

For the CISO, this is not simply a visibility tool. It is a foundation for a more honest and defensible exposure management program; one that covers the full scope of the modern attack surface, not just the portion that traditional tools were designed to see.

The pressure to modernize exposure management is no longer theoretical. IT/OT convergence has outpaced the discovery tools most organizations rely on, leaving a growing gap between what security teams believe they can see and what is actually present on their networks. The emergence of AI-assisted vulnerability discovery and exploitation only increases this threat. For CISOs, this gap represents both an operational vulnerability and an accountability risk.

Urgency

The expansion of operational technology into IP-connected environments has been underway for years, but the security implications are still catching up with the operational reality. Manufacturers, utilities, healthcare systems, and enterprise campuses now operate hybrid environments where OT devices share network infrastructure with corporate IT, often with minimal or missing segmentation, no standardized asset management, and no existing mechanism for continuous discovery.

Threat actors have taken notice. Attacks targeting OT infrastructure, industrial control systems, and unmanaged IoT devices have increased in both frequency and sophistication. The appeal is straightforward: these devices are frequently invisible to conventional security tooling, difficult to patch or update, and often configured with factory-default credentials that have never been changed. They represent an attacker’s path of least resistance.

For CISOs, the urgency is compounded by the accountability dimension. Regulatory frameworks increasingly require organizations to demonstrate visibility and control over their full asset inventory, including OT and IoT. Board-level risk reporting expectations have risen accordingly. 

Risk

The risks associated with delayed action on exposure management modernization are both operational and strategic.

• Operational risk: Discovery gaps allow vulnerable, unmanaged, or misconfigured devices to persist in the environment indefinitely. An attacker who identifies one such device via passive reconnaissance or opportunistic scanning gains a potential foothold that security teams may never detect.

• Compliance and regulatory risk: Frameworks such as NERC CIP, NIS2, and evolving SEC disclosure requirements create concrete obligations around asset visibility and vulnerability management. Organizations that lack OT discovery capability face increasing exposure to audit findings and enforcement actions. There is also industry-specific risk in healthcare such as medical devices and any other sector dealing with life-safety sensors and IoT devices.

• Deployment risk in OT environments: Active scanning in OT contexts carries inherent sensitivity. Devices with limited processing capacity or fragile protocol stacks can be affected by poorly configured scanning activity. Organizations should evaluate how any discovery solution handles OT-specific scanning constraints and whether it provides appropriate policy controls to protect sensitive environments.

runZero’s approach to exposure management delivers operational benefits that extend well beyond improved asset inventory. For security leaders managing complex, converged environments, the platform addresses the gap between what traditional tools can discover and what the modern attack surface actually contains in terms of both assets and exposures. Key benefits include:

• Unified intelligence across IT, OT, and IoT: A single platform replaces the fragmented combination of point tools, spreadsheets, and manual processes that most organizations currently rely on for cross-environment inventory. Security teams gain a consistent, continuously updated view of all networked assets, regardless of type, managed status, or location.

• Agentless, credential-free deployment: runZero does not require agents installed on endpoints or preconfigured credentials for managed devices. This eliminates the deployment barriers that limit the reach of agent-based tools and makes coverage of unmanaged assets, including OT and IoT devices, immediately achievable.

• Exposure context beyond CVEs: By surfacing EOL devices, multi-homed devices, unmanaged assets, default credentials, anomalous assets, and misconfiguration risks alongside traditional vulnerability data, runZero provides a more complete picture of organizational exposure. This enables security teams to prioritize based on attacker-relevant risk, not just CVSS scores.

• Attack path mapping: runZero’s attack path visualization shows the relationship between exposed assets and the routes an attacker might take between them. This capability surfaces segmentation issues, high-risk assets, and choke points that could grant attackers access to high-value network zones, and it contextualizes individual exposures within the broader network topology, enabling more targeted and effective remediation.

• Rapid time-to-value: Because deployment does not require credential management or agent rollout, organizations can achieve meaningful coverage and insights quickly. Continuous discovery ensures the inventory remains current without manual intervention, while risk prioritization minimizes noise by focusing attention on the exposures most likely to lead to exploitation.

Improving exposure management across converged environments requires more than deploying a new tool; it requires aligning discovery, prioritization, and remediation workflows around a more complete understanding of the attack surface. Organizations that approach this systematically will realize the most sustained value from the platform.

• Start with scope definition: Before initiating discovery, align security, IT, and OT stakeholders on the boundaries of what should be scanned, at what frequency, and with what policy constraints. OT environments in particular require scanning capabilities that are proven safe enough for sensitive assets while still being effective.

• Use discovery to drive inventory hygiene: Treat the initial discovery output not just as a vulnerability feed but as an inventory audit. Identify assets that should not be present, devices without ownership assignment, and segments with no prior visibility. This sets a meaningful baseline for ongoing exposure management.

• Prioritize exposures by attacker relevance, not just severity score: EOL devices, default credentials, and unmanaged assets frequently represent higher real-world risk than high CVSS vulnerabilities on managed, monitored systems. Build prioritization workflows that account for the attacker path of least resistance and potential for highest operational impact, not just technical severity.

• Integrate with existing security tooling: runZero is designed to complement, not replace, existing security investments. Integrating discovery data with SIEM, SOAR, and CMDB platforms ensures that exposure context flows into existing detection and response workflows rather than existing in a separate silo.

• Establish continuous discovery as a program standard: Periodic or point-in-time scans are insufficient for environments where devices connect and disconnect dynamically. Continuous discovery should be treated as a baseline operational requirement, not a periodic audit activity.

• Align exposure reporting to board-level risk language: Discovery data is most actionable when translated into business risk terms. CISOs should establish reporting cadences that connect exposure metrics, coverage gaps, unmanaged asset counts, and attack path density to organizational risk tolerance and regulatory commitments.

Deploying a unified exposure management platform has implications that extend beyond the security operations team. For organizations operating in converged IT/OT environments, the shift to comprehensive asset visibility touches governance structures, cross-functional relationships, and long-term investment planning.

People Impact

The most significant people impact is the requirement for closer collaboration between security, IT, and OT organizations. In many enterprises, these functions have historically been in separate operational silos, with distinct tooling, distinct ownership models, and limited cross-functional visibility. runZero’s unified platform creates a shared operational framework that requires alignment around asset ownership, exposure prioritization, and remediation accountability.

Security teams will need to develop or deepen familiarity with OT device types, protocols, and operational constraints. This is not a deep engineering requirement, but practitioners who understand the difference between a managed endpoint and a PLC—and why they cannot be treated identically from a scanning policy perspective—will be more effective operators of the platform.

OT and facilities teams, in turn, may need to engage more actively in the security program than has historically been expected of them. Establishing clear escalation paths for OT-sourced findings and defining who owns remediation for unmanaged or legacy industrial assets are organizational issues that should be resolved before or alongside deployment.

Investment Outlook

runZero’s agentless model eliminates a significant category of deployment cost that burdens agent-based competitors: deployment effort, infrastructure provisioning, credential management, and ongoing agent lifecycle overhead. For organizations that have experienced the true total cost of maintaining agent-based discovery at scale, including the hidden labor cost of managing exceptions and coverage gaps, the operational efficiency comparison is significant.

The more relevant investment framing for a CISO audience, however, is risk-adjusted value. Discovery gaps in OT and IoT environments represent real financial exposure: from regulatory enforcement actions, from breach scenarios that originate in unmanaged assets, and from the cost of incident response in environments where baseline inventory was never established. The cost of not knowing what is on the network is not zero, and for organizations with significant OT infrastructure, it is demonstrably high.

Organizations should evaluate the platform cost against the combined cost of the point tools that can consolidate asset inventory, vulnerability prioritization, and OT-specific discovery, as well as the operational overhead those tools require. A unified platform that covers more of the attack surface with less deployment and ongoing management friction represents a structurally favorable investment profile, independent of specific pricing.

One of runZero’s structural advantages is deployment speed. Because the platform does not require agent installation, pre-provisioned credential sets, or appliances, organizations can move from initial configuration to meaningful coverage significantly faster than with agent-based or appliance-dependent alternatives. In many environments, initial discovery results are available within hours of deployment, rather than the weeks or months typical of agent rollout programs.

Future Considerations

The exposure management space is evolving rapidly in response to the same IT/OT convergence trends that make runZero’s approach relevant today. As connected devices proliferate further across manufacturing, healthcare, smart infrastructure, and enterprise campuses, the requirement for credential-free, protocol-aware discovery will only intensify.

runZero has demonstrated sustained investment in expanding its protocol coverage and OT device fingerprinting capabilities. Organizations evaluating a three-year planning horizon should consider not just current feature coverage, but the vendor’s trajectory in addressing emerging device categories and evolving attack surface complexity.

Attack path analysis is also an area of active development across the exposure management market. Organizations that embed this capability into their remediation prioritization workflows today will be better positioned to leverage more sophisticated risk modeling capabilities as the space matures.

The exposure management market is crowded with tools that do one thing well: scan managed assets, report CVEs, and produce prioritization queues. runZero’s differentiation is not incremental improvement within that established category. It is a fundamentally broader scope of coverage; one that reflects where the attack surface actually lives today and beyond.

The “you can’t secure what you can’t see” axiom has been repeated so often it has nearly lost meaning. runZero’s contribution is to operationalize it in environments where it is genuinely true: OT floors, IoT-dense campuses, and hybrid networks where traditional agent-based scanning simply does not reach. The agentless, credential-free model is frequently positioned as the differentiator; it is more accurately a prerequisite for coverage in these environments. Organizations that have tried to force agent-based tools into OT environments understand this intuitively.

The more consequential distinction is one the market has historically treated as a contradiction in terms: safe active scanning of OT. Conventional wisdom holds that actively probing fragile industrial devices risks disrupting the processes they control, which is why many OT programs default to passive-only discovery and accept the visibility gaps that come with it. runZero's position is that active scanning can be performed safely enough in these environments to close that gap, and the claim has been examined independently rather than simply asserted. In NREL's DOE-sponsored Clean Energy Cybersecurity Accelerator, runZero's active scanning identified all IP-addressable IT and OT assets in a representative test environment without degrading device or process performance. For a capability the industry has largely assumed to be unsafe, independent validation of this kind is more persuasive than any vendor-run benchmark. 

For organizations that have deferred comprehensive IT/OT/IoT visibility work due to deployment complexity concerns, runZero’s approach lowers the barrier significantly. The question for CISOs is straightforward: does your current exposure management program reflect the full scope of your network? If the honest answer is no, and for most organizations with meaningful OT or IoT presence, it is, runZero warrants serious evaluation.

This GigaOm CPO Decision Brief analyzes a specific technology and related solution to provide executive decision-makers with the information they need to drive successful IT strategies that align with the business. The report focuses on large impact zones that are often overlooked in technical research, yielding enhanced insights and mitigating risk.

Chris Ray is a veteran of the cyber security domain. He has a collection of experiences ranging from small teams to large financial institutions. Additionally, Chris has worked in healthcare, manufacturing, and tech. More recently, he has acquired an extensive amount of experience advising and consulting with security vendors, helping them find product-market fit as well as deliver cyber security services.

GigaOm provides technical, operational, and business advice for IT’s strategic digital enterprise and business initiatives. Enterprise business leaders, CIOs, and technology organizations partner with GigaOm for practical, actionable, strategic, and visionary advice for modernizing and transforming their business. GigaOm’s advice empowers enterprises to successfully compete in an increasingly complicated business atmosphere that requires a solid understanding of constantly changing customer demands.

GigaOm works directly with enterprises both inside and outside of the IT organization to apply proven research and methodologies designed to avoid pitfalls and roadblocks while balancing risk and innovation. Research methodologies include but are not limited to adoption and benchmarking surveys, use cases, interviews, ROI/TCO, market landscapes, strategic trends, and technical benchmarks. Our analysts possess 20+ years of experience advising a spectrum of clients from early adopters to mainstream enterprises.

GigaOm’s perspective is that of the unbiased enterprise practitioner. Through this perspective, GigaOm connects with engaged and loyal subscribers on a deep and meaningful level.

© Knowingly, Inc. 2026 "Exposure Management for the Modern Attack Surface" is a trademark of Knowingly, Inc. For permission to reproduce this report, please contact sales@gigaom.com.