State of Vulnerability Remediation

Companies that experience tool sprawl report 51% lower remediation confidence compared to those who did not experience tool sprawl in 2025.

22% of respondent organizations are using their CI/CD pipelines to deliver fixes and remediations.

35% of respondent organizations are not currently using their CI/CD pipelines for remediation but want to in 2025.

4% of organizations took more than 15 days to remediate critical vulnerabilities in 2025.

60% of respondents reported that fewer than 5% of vulnerabilities and misconfigurations recurred within a month of remediation in 2025.

35% of respondents cited rollbacks of patches as a cause of vulnerability recurrence.

91% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their organization is improving in its ability to remediate vulnerabilities in 2025, according to a survey of respondents.

1% of respondents reported being 'not at all confident' in their organization's ability to remediate known vulnerabilities in a timely manner.

Tool sprawl reduces confidence in remediation by 51% in 2025.

28% of organizations report that IT operations is primarily responsible for remediating vulnerabilities and misconfigurations reported by security.

42% of IT and security professionals reported working in both IT operations and security in 2025, according to a survey of 125 respondents

52% report on their remediation efforts ‘quarterly’, ‘rarely’, or ‘never’ in 2025, while only 18% run weekly reports.

26% of respondents stated that the recurrence of vulnerabilities and misconfigurations was between 6% and 10% within a month of remediation in 2025.

44% of security and IT operators indicated that auto-creating tickets with all relevant information would improve remediation in 2025.

18% of organizations surveyed reported tracking and reporting their remediation efforts on a weekly basis while 30% reported doing so monthly.

39% of respondents reported not using a vulnerability remediation tracking tool in 2025, relying instead on manual tracking using spreadsheets.

48% of respondents reported being 'fairly confident' in their organization's ability to remediate known vulnerabilities in a timely manner.

18% of respondents identified lack of scanning in CI/CD as a main reason for the recurrence of vulnerabilities in 2025.

71% of organizations reported that they remediate critical vulnerabilities within 24–72 hours in 2025.

33% of organizations reported remediating critical vulnerabilities within one to three days in 2025, compared to 32% for high-importance vulnerabilities.

Only 9% of security and IT operators being 'very confident' in their remediation capabilities in 2025.

38% of organizations reported remediating critical vulnerabilities within 24 hours in 2025, compared to 35% for high-importance vulnerabilities.

Almost 50% of organizations reported using more than five security tools in 2025.

60% of IT and security operators do not have any remediation SLAs in 2025, and among those that track SLAs, 65% have to analyze data manually.

53% of security and IT teams experiencing tool sprawl reported low confidence in remediation in 2025, compared to 35% who do not experience tool sprawl.

33% of respondents stated that more remediation guidance and code snippets would help them remediate significantly faster in 2025.

33% of respondents reported using manual processes, such as spreadsheets, for tracking vulnerability remediation marking a significant reliance on non-automated methods.

27% of respondents reported using the Atlassian Suite/JIRA for tracking vulnerability remediation.

14% reported using Azure DevOps for tracking vulnerability remediation.

Seventy-eight percent of organizations reported finding fewer than five vulnerabilities per machine per month, according to a survey of IT and security teams.

Ten percent of organizations report finding between six and ten vulnerabilities per machine per month.

37% of respondents expressed concern about lack of traceability or rollback options as a pain point for automation.

Only 11% of organizations reported finding more than ten vulnerabilities per machine per month in 2025.

Ten percent of organizations reported that the DevOps/Product engineering team is primarily responsible for remediating vulnerabilities and misconfigurations reported by security.

Fourteen percent of organizations indicated that the security team is primarily responsible for remediating vulnerabilities and misconfigurations reported by security.

At 46% of companies, vulnerability remediation is a shared responsibility between security and IT operations teams.

40% of respondents reported 'too many siloed tools' as a significant pain point in vulnerability remediation.

40% of respondents indicated 'not enough visibility' as a significant pain point in vulnerability remediation.

52% of organizations surveyed reported their remediation efforts either quarterly, rarely, or never.

9% of respondents indicated that their organizations experienced a security incident due to a delay in vulnerability remediation.

11% of respondents reported that the recurrence of vulnerabilities and misconfigurations was between 11% and 30% within a month of remediation in 2025.

44% of respondents reported that the manual effort needed to find the owner of an artifact and fix it is one of the biggest pain points for remediating vulnerabilities and misconfigurations.

42% of respondents indicated that tickets don’t include enough remediation information.

44% of respondents indicated that vulnerabilities are reintroduced during the redeployment of software.

34% of respondents stated that vulnerabilities are being fixed in runtime, but not in the source code.

Between 6% and 10% of vulnerabilities recur according to 26% of respondents.

42% of respondents reported being 'slightly confident' in their organization's ability to remediate known vulnerabilities in a timely manner.

Fewer than 10% of respondents reported being 'very confident' in their ability to remediate known vulnerabilities in a timely manner in 2025, while 43% reported being either 'slightly confident' or 'not confident at all'.

54% of organizations with SLAs define their target MTTR as less than 24 hours.

Only 20% of organizations with SLAs consistently meet their MTTR SLA.

40% of respondent organizations have set Mean Time to Remediation (MTTR) SLAs.

26% of organizations have a one-to-three day SLA for MTTR.

Only 2% of organizations reported that their remediation processes are fully automated.

44% of respondents reported that lack of visibility made it hard to know what was remediated, when, and why.

40% of organizations stated that their remediation processes are manual and ad-hoc in 2025.

31% of respondents believe that instantly seeing the owner of an artifact would help them remediate significantly faster.

40% of respondents stated that better prioritization would help them remediate significantly faster.

44% of respondents indicated that auto-creating tickets with all relevant info included would help them remediate significantly faster in 2025.

24% of respondents believe that more ownership from DevOps/platform engineers would help them remediate significantly faster in 2025.

22% of respondents cited basic organizational resistance as a pain point for automation.

Two-thirds of respondent organizations lack an automated method for reporting on SLAs.

29% of respondents indicated that lack of clean integration with existing CI/CD and ITSM tools was a concern in 2025.

36% of organizations indicated that their remediation processes are mostly automated with some manual steps.

34% of respondents believe that automated remediation integrated into a CI pipeline would speed up remediations.

50% of respondents identified the risk of breaking applications or dependencies as a pain point for automation.

28% of respondents indicated that automated ticket tracking instead of just 'fire and forget' would help them remediate significantly faster.