CTEM stands apart from traditional vulnerability management programs in several key ways: Proactive vs. Reactive Approach: Traditional programs reactively address vulnerabilities post-discovery, while CTEM proactively monitors the threat landscape, prioritizing preemptive remediation to mitigate potential exploits. Broader Scope: While traditional programs often focus solely on technical vulnerabilities, CTEM takes a holistic view, recognizing threats from various sources such as configuration errors, credential misuse, and insider risks. Business-Aligned Prioritization: Traditional approaches may struggle to prioritize remediation efforts effectively, whereas CTEM aligns priorities with business objectives, concentrating on threats that pose the greatest risk to critical assets. Continuous Improvement: Traditional methods tend to be static, with periodic scans. In contrast, CTEM emphasizes continuous enhancement by perpetually monitoring. Integration with Security Controls: While traditional practices often operate independently, CTEM integrates seamlessly with existing security measures, promoting a cohesive strategy for managing threat exposure. Emphasis on Validation: Traditional approaches rely on theoretical assessments, whereas CTEM places a premium on validation. It employs tools like Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) and Security Control Validation to simulate attacks and verify the effectiveness of defensive measures.