TruRisk vs Traditional Approach Workflow

The fundamental difference between traditional vulnerability management and TruRisk lies in how each approach processes and prioritizes threat data. Traditional methods follow a linear path from vulnerability discovery to CVSS scoring to remediation, often missing critical context about real-world exploitation.

TruRisk transforms this into a comprehensive risk assessment by integrating multiple intelligence sources, contextual asset information, and active threat data to produce actionable prioritization that reflects genuine organizational risk rather than theoretical severity.

How TruRisk Compares to CVSS and EPSS

A side-by-side look at how TruRisk offers greater clarity, context, and business impact than CVSS and EPSS.

Key Factor and What It Means	CVSS	EPSS	TruRisk
Contextual Risk Considers asset exposure (e.g., internet-facing, crown jewels), exploitability, and compensating controls.
Business Impact Factors in the importance of the asset to your business (e.g., production server vs. development server).
Exploit Intelligence Uses threat intelligence, such as active exploits, ransomware associations, malware campaigns, to flag vulnerabilities tied to real-world attacks.		Limited
Dynamic Scoring Continuously updates scores based on changing threat landscape or posture.
Consolidated Risk View Maps multiple CVEs and misconfigurations into a single TruRisk score per asset or group.
Operational Value Helps security and IT teams focus on the most urgent threats, reducing noise from theoretical risks	Limited	Limited