What should be included in a vulnerability assessment report?

Have in mind that your readers might not be cyber experts, and you’ll want all stakeholders -- regardless of their technical proficiency -- to grasp the significance of the assessment and its findings. You’ll likely be more successful using clear, plain and concise communication, and avoiding overly technical terms.

One very useful, and often omitted, input is the CVSS score of the finding; this ensures the testers and leads writing the report are not bringing in too much of subjectivity; having the Base CVSS score is essential, but if the testers and auditors have more business context, CVSS environment metrics can be very helpful; Mapping to OWASP is also very useful as this classification helps in more comprehensive vulnerability management and risk aggregation. Other hygiene factors like screenshots, request/response snippets and references also help the development teams perform better remediation and reverification;

Actionable insight, that's it, that's the contribution. I'll go on due to the minimum character limit. There's no point having great visuals or statistics if the report isn't useful to the recipient. Clear, actionable advice with business context on what to remediate and how to ensure a bigger bang for the buck is key.

Drawing from three decades in cybersecurity, I've found that an executive summary's value is twofold: it provides a swift overview for busy stakeholders and sets the tone for the report. A well-structured summary doesn't merely list objectives and findings; it tells a story—painting a vivid picture of the current security posture. Using non-technical language, it should succinctly emphasize not only the vulnerabilities but also the broader business implications, urging stakeholders towards swift, informed action.

It has to align objectives, scope, methodology, results, recommendations, vulnerabilities, and remediation steps. It's crucial for clarity, written in non-technical language, and aims to engage readers to understand. This acts as a gateway to the report, ensuring that the main takeaways are effectively communicated, understood.

The executive summary is indeed the gateway to the report, and its role in summarizing key findings and recommendations concisely cannot be overstated. It's essential to grab the attention of both technical and non-technical stakeholders. The background and context section provides the necessary backdrop for readers to understand why the assessment was conducted and the broader context in which vulnerabilities exist. Clear context can make the subsequent information more actionable. The assessment methodology section is where the technical details shine. It's essential to describe the tools, standards, and techniques used to perform the assessment to ensure transparency and reproducibility.

The background and context section gives essential details about the assessed system, what is its purpose, users, and reasons for the assessment. This helps the readers grasp the detailed assessment's scope and significance, providing crucial information for the report. At the end of the day, this section enhances the overall effectiveness and relevance of the assessment report.

On my latest assessment in the government, there were many compliance requirements from many departments. Some enforced higher more stringent standards to security control profiles so I made to sure to highlight the levels we needed to meet as to reduce the risks in getting an Authorization To Operate.

In the Scope of Assessment, we’re essentially drawing the boundaries of our playground. For the younger ones stepping into cybersecurity, imagine it as setting the GPS before a road trip. We're deciding which roads we’ll travel down, and which we’ll bypass especially tolls if they are pricey. It’s crucial because when we talk about the vulnerabilities and risks later on, they’re all found within these set boundaries. Believe me, starting with a clear map makes the whole journey, every discovery and decision crystal clear.

In my three decades in cybersecurity, I've realized that understanding a system's unique landscape is critical. This section isn't just about the system's specifications; it's an opportunity to delve into its life story. For instance, a financial institution's network isn't just a set of servers and databases; it's a dynamic environment shaped by regulatory changes, evolving market demands, and previous security incidents. Weaving in these elements gives life to the assessment, transforming a technical report into a narrative that resonates with the distinct challenges and aspirations of the organization. This personalized approach turns a standard procedure into a compelling, strategic tool, vital for decision-makers.

In the Assessment Methodology section, we’re basically laying out our game plan. If you're new to this, think of it like planning a heist similar to Money Heist, except we’re the good guys. We have our bag of tools and tricks, some techy stuff and a bit of old-school wisdom, all aimed at finding where the weak spots are. We start wide, scanning everything we can see, and then zoom in to focus on the interesting bits, the places where things might not be as secure as they should be. It’s a bit like looking for hidden treasures, except these are weaknesses that bad guys could exploit. And trust me, having a solid game plan, knowing exactly how you’ll search and what you’re looking for - that’s half the battle won.

The assessment methodology section outlines tools, techniques, and criteria used, and it has to explain how scanning, testing, and analysis were conducted. It ensures the validity and reliability of the assessment process and results. Let's imagine that a manufacturing company conducts an assessment to identify eco-friendly practices to reduce carbon footprint to enhance environmental responsibility in their production processes.

every organization can choose the assessment on the scale of qualitiative and quantitative evaluation. It might be helpful to conduct a generic assessment before a specific one if you are just starting your first assessment ever.

Did you follow NIST, OWASP, ITSG, CIS, ISO... frameworks? What tools and techniques from these frameworks did you use? Who are the threat actors? When you did application or system assessment, where did you perform the assessment from? What type of tools did you use to identify and potentially exploit the vulnerability? Can it be easily exploited? Is that part of the code reachable? What is the value of the asset? Likelihood x Impact = Risk

Assessment methodology is very important because, it helps you understand the tools and tests you used for vulnerability scanning, such as penetration testing or cloud-based scans.

Do not report the severity of the vulnerabilities (CVSS). Instead, convert the vulnerability into a perceived risk score. Some of the factors to consider are: - Likelihood (Threat agent & Vulnerability factors). - Impact (Technical impact & Business impact factors).

The assessment findings section presents vulnerabilities and what are the risks, including impact, and evidence with any type of screenshots, organized in clear formats for easy and reading comprehension. Just like a detailed map in a treasure hunt, providing clear markings and descriptions of discovered obstacles for example risks and vulnerabilities. This will make sure to guide treasure seekers efficiently.

A good reports stating the findings its not just showing the vulnerabilities, but also the technique used, the severity based on best practices and business and security risks, the potential impact, mitigations, references and all in detailed not superficial. We need to know exactly how, when, where and how deep the vulnerability can open to malicious actors. Tables well defined, screenshots with clear indication and data reports manipulation make a great report.

If you found some good, share it and always lead with that. Depending on what is being assessed and the scope, I like to categorize rather than use priority especially if there are many teams involved like networking, app, dev... But typically go with priority and start with the worse down to the lows. Each reported vulnerability should come with clear details as well as evidence of exploitation, and impact. Logs, screenshots, or PCAPs should also be submitted as evidence. Create references at the end of report for reference points instead of trying to fit too much. Please make sure you include everything a developer would need to reproduce the issue, including your contact information.

Revealing the assessment findings is akin to unearthing hidden treasures. This section is more than a list of vulnerabilities; it's a revelation of the system's secret weaknesses and potential fortifications. In my experience, categorizing these findings by their potential impact on business operations, coupled with clear, engaging visuals like risk heat maps, can turn complex data into compelling insights. This approach not only enhances readability for non-technical stakeholders but also strategically highlights areas requiring immediate attention, turning a technical report into a powerful tool for informed decision-making.

One thing I’ve found helpful when performing vulnerability assessments is adding section within each finding table which rates the ease of remediation (everyone loves easy wins/low hanging fruit!). Additionally, instead of offering a standard report sorted by CVE ratings and criticality - the analysis could be taken one step further, and offer the client (or ops/infra/network team, if conducted internally) the option of a secondary report sorted in groupings of fix actions. For example, an outdated TLS finding would be placed next to any other security protocol misconfigurations to be addressed at the same time! This allows the team to easily bake in some efficiency and hopefully make more progress between assessments.

Assessment recommendations section should outline specific steps to resolve vulnerabilities, prioritizing tasks, assigning responsibilities and deadlines, while suggesting best practices for long-term prevention. Let's take for example a small startup which implements a cybersecurity assessment following a data breach or cyber-attack, this will be strengthening their network security and employee training to prevent future incidents.

One often overlooked opportunity in assessment recommendations is the detailed breakdown of vulnerabilities based on stakeholders' (STH) values. I call this the "Major Areas of Interest" for various STH. The CIO may prioritize data security impact, while the CTO may focus on impact versus EBITA loss. This approach allows you to highlight multiple recommendations aligned with different STH interests/satisfaction levels. You can outline the specific benefits and levels of satisfaction that each recommendation brings to these individuals or combined groups. You can demonstrate that a particular recommendation effectively satisfies stakeholders A and C's interests, Crucial for gaining support from key decision-makers.

In crafting recommendations, I draw upon decades of experience to propose solutions that go beyond patching vulnerabilities. This section is a blueprint for resilience, combining immediate remedial actions with strategic long-term planning. It's essential to provide a mix of quick fixes and deep, systemic changes, addressing both the symptoms and the root causes of the issues identified. By integrating these recommendations into the broader context of the organization's goals and challenges, we transform them from a checklist into a strategic roadmap, aligning cybersecurity with business objectives and future-proofing the organization.

For each vulnerability, provide specific, actionable recommendations for mitigation or remediation. This could include patch management, configuration changes, or broader security enhancements.

Clearly define and prioritize assets or systems that are most critical to your organization. Focus your assessment on these assets. What are you trying to achieve with this report? Clearly identify which systems, applications, or network segments will be included in the assessment and which will not. Remember that the assets included in the assessment are part of an ecosystem; tell how assets have dependencies that are not included in the assessment.

Something that could add value, as it did for my organization, is to include the evaluation of processes that are used to support the systems. If assessing for a group and multiple systems that a team supports, it may be useful to not only use a table but have a link to a 'technical details' document that would be most useful for remediation efforts, assuming the audience would be primarily managers. Something else worth mentioning is ensuring security and access to these documents. Not only do they need to be classified appropriately but also encrypted at rest with a strict access policy. Depending on the organization's size and risk levels, monitoring restricted documents is always a worthwhile conversation

Discussing limitations is not just an act of transparency; it's an opportunity to demonstrate wisdom and foresight. This section showcases our ability to recognize and anticipate the complexities of cybersecurity assessments. Acknowledging limitations like scope constraints or evolving threat landscapes, and suggesting areas for deeper investigation in future assessments, reflects our commitment to continuous improvement and learning. This honest, proactive approach reinforces our credibility and dedication to cybersecurity excellence, turning potential weaknesses into a display of strategic thinking and adaptability.

For each vulnerability, provide specific, actionable recommendations for mitigation or remediation. This could include patch management, configuration changes, or broader security enhancements.

A vulnerability assessment report should include the following information: 1. Executive Summary 2. Introduction 3. Methodology 4. Assessment Results 5. Risk Rating/Scoring 6. Recommended Actions 7. Technical Details 8. Supporting Evidence 9. Conclusion 10. Appendices It is important to note that the content and structure of a vulnerability assessment report can vary depending on the specific requirements of the organization and the target system being assessed.

It's essential to establish a well-documented "Path to Challenge or Question" process in your cybersecurity practices. For instance, when conducting application security assessments and sharing reports with development teams, create a process that clearly outlines the burden of proof required to dispute your findings. Involve the development teams in shaping this process to ensure their input. This approach minimizes frustration, enhances the value of your work, and promotes organized discussions and debates on vulnerability assessment matters.

Always have 2 types of vulnerability reports - an executive summary which is non-technical (which can be widely shared with internal teams and even potentially customers as well) and a detailed technical report (which is on a need-to-know basis and has limited circulation and restricted access)

In a vulnerability assessment report, should include an executive summary for non-technical stakeholders, details on the assessment's scope and methodology, a list of discovered vulnerabilities with their technical specifics, an evaluation of risk and potential impact, actionable recommendations for remediation prioritized by risk, a clear remediation plan with responsibilities and timelines, and any compliance-related considerations. Let's say a critical vulnerability in patient record database, potentially exposing sensitive medical data has been identified in healthcare product. Then report should not only highlights this issue but also recommends an urgent fix and outlines how the organization can improve its overall security.