Enhancing Threat and Vulnerability Management with an Advanced Model
In in my previous article, (https://medium.com/@syncronuts/building-resilience-optimising-threat-and-vulnerability-management-in-an-evolving-cyber-landscape-6dac138ded04) we explored the principles of building resilience in Threat and Vulnerability Management (TVM) to address the dynamic and ever-changing cyber threat landscape. As organisations strive to evolve their security posture, an advanced TVM model offers a more granular, structured, and actionable approach to tackling threats and vulnerabilities. This article introduces an expanded model for TVM and further explains its value to architects and security professionals.
Below is the model discussed in the first article which explains all of the core components of a Threat Intelligence and Predictive Security capability (or Domain in SABSA speak)
You can download a scalable PDF version here -> https://www.assuredcontrol.com/downloads/files/TVM_PDF.pdf
The Expanded TVM Model
The TVM model utilises the reference framework below. This Security Services Entity Relationship Diagram helps explain the relationships between the different parts of the TVM model. It shows the links from business motivations through to services (or controls) and further to a more comprehensive breakdown, including mechanisms, sub-mechanisms, physical systems, and commercial products.
Link to a scalable PDF Version of the reference framework — https://www.assuredcontrol.com/downloads/files/SRM_v1.pdf
In the first article, we touched on conceptual (Domains and Subdomains), contextual (why), and logical layers (service or control) without actually calling them out. In this one, we explore the Logical layer and below in more depth— using the “Threat Intelligence Aggregation Service” as an example and expand it by describing its Physical and Component Layer elements.
The Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD) above is aligned to SABSA, hence the terminology and structure.
Here’s a high-level view of the model’s structure:
- Logical Layer: Defines the Logical Layer services (or controls), such as Threat Intelligence Aggregation Service and its core sub services (or Controls) such as Data Aggregation Engine, Data Normalisation Mechanisms, and Threat Categorisation Engine.
- Mechanisms: Are a Physical Layer concept describing the components which enable the execution of the referenced services, e.g., data enrichment engines, normalisation tools, and correlation systems.
- Sub-Mechanisms: Are the specific processes or tools performing detailed tasks within each mechanism, such as API integration modules or feed management systems.
- Physical Systems: These are the infrastructure, platforms, and tools that support the delivery of the mechanisms and sub-mechanisms. These are the roots which support the tree — to use an analogy — examples include SIEM platforms, cloud hosting solutions, and threat intelligence platforms (TIPs).
Our Example: Threat Intelligence Aggregation
I have picked just one of the services to demonstrate the utility of the framework. In time, I will produce the breakdown for each of the services within the Threat Intelligence Management (Sub Domain) and then move on to each of the other subdomains within the “Threat Intelligence and Predictive Security” domain (See the 1st diagram above).
This extension of the previous model focuses on the “Threat Intelligence Management” subdomain and, in particular, the Threat Intelligence Aggregation Service (or control). This includes;
- Mechanisms: Aggregation Mechanisms and Engines, Normalisation Mechanisms and a Categorisation Engine.
- Sub-Mechanisms: Feed management tools, Data Enrichment processes and Integration Mechanisms.
- Physical Systems: The platform components that serve up the mechanisms and sub-mechanisms, including examples of these.
- Products: These are the commercial products which provide the capability. Note these are not recommendations simply examples to help people relate the concept to a tangible product or service.
Download a scalable PDF version of the model above here -> https://www.assuredcontrol.com/downloads/files/TI_Aggregation.pdf
This layered approach ensures that every element of TVM — strategic goals, operational workflows, and technical implementations — works in harmony to deliver measurable security value.
The model doesn’t dip into roles and responsibilities or delve deeply into the processes just yet. What it does do, however, is allow an architect to construct a capability which considers everything needed. Using the model, you can ask how it is to be delivered, who will operate and maintain it, and what we need to achieve the value defined within the subdomain and its parent domain.
What we do as architects isn’t easy, and this model demonstrates the complexity of a small part of a much bigger ecosystem.
Value to Architects and Security Professionals
The expanded TVM model provides substantial benefits to both enterprise architects and security professionals by addressing critical challenges in operational alignment, resource optimisation, and risk management.
1. Enhanced Clarity and Precision
The detailed decomposition of services into mechanisms and sub-mechanisms bridges the gap between abstract goals and actionable tasks. Security architects gain a clear blueprint for designing and implementing systems that align with organisational needs, while operational teams benefit from well-defined processes and deliverables.
2. Improved Resource Allocation
By providing detailed mappings of vulnerabilities and threats to their associated risks, the model supports prioritisation efforts. Architects and security managers can focus resources on high-impact areas, ensuring cost-effective investments in tools and capabilities.
3. Operational Efficiency
Mechanisms and sub-mechanisms streamline the collection, validation, and dissemination of threat intelligence. This structure reduces redundancy, enhances process automation, and accelerates incident response, allowing security professionals to act decisively.
4. Stronger Collaboration
The model describes outputs — such as tailored reports, dashboards, and shared intelligence — to promote collaboration between teams and external partners. Architects benefit from having a shared framework to align IT, security, and business stakeholders, enabling unity in decision-making.
5. Scalability and Adaptability
The inclusion of modular mechanisms and sub-mechanisms allows organisations to adapt to new threats, technologies, and compliance requirements. This scalability ensures that the security architecture remains future-proof.
Delivering Real-World Impact
This advanced model transforms TVM from a reactive function viewed as a black box into a proactive force for organisational resilience. For example, the integration of enriched threat intelligence into SIEM platforms provides real-time insights, while prioritised vulnerability reports help decision-makers allocate resources effectively. These outputs empower organisations to stay ahead of evolving cyber threats.
For architects, the expanded model provides a structured framework for designing scalable, integrated, and business-aligned security solution for delivering a Threat Intelligence and Predictive Security capability. The ERD can be applied to other security domains in order to produce comprehensive service designs. For security professionals, the TVM model presented here will help deliver actionable tools and insights to enhance situational awareness and incident readiness.
Conclusion
In a time where the threat landscape evolves faster than ever, the TVM model offers a robust, actionable approach to security. Breaking down high-level services into detailed mechanisms and outputs equips architects and security professionals with the clarity, precision, and tools they need to defend against modern threats effectively.
Let’s continue the conversation. How do you see this expanded model fitting into your organisation’s security strategy? What challenges do you think it can address in your current operations? Feel free to contact me on esa@assuredcontrol.com if you want to discuss further. There is more to come as I intend to model out the full “Threat Intelligence and Predictive Security” capability in full, over time (it isn’t quick as you can imagine).
