I thought I might post an actual Cyber Security / InfoSec thing for once.

"Visibility without consequences is not governance."

https://www.csoonline.com/article/4136995/boards-dont-need-cyber-metrics-they-need-risk-signals.html

This is a great article.

A large portion of my job is quantifying risk and turning it into numbers to help prioritize vulnerabilities, pen test findings, CNAPP reports, compliance failures,, and misconfigurations. I use all kinds of values to calculate "a number" for each finding. I'll probably throw up my methodology on gist soon because I'd like feedback and ideas for how to make it better. Incidentally, is there a gist equivalent on Codeberg?

With that said, this article talks about all the things that "a number" cannot do and all the other important things the board and other stakeholders and decision makers at that level should know.

There are lots of quotable lines, but my favorite, the one I'd like on a T-shirt or hanging on posters in every break room is: "Visibility without consequences is not governance."

It's important because we run up against it time and time again. A business line WONTFIX so they get an exception for X months (or years). That number no longer counts against them. As my boss likes to joke, "we'll just tell the malicious actors we have an exception and ask them not to exploit it." That doesn't work. It hides risk. But when all you care about is "a number" then fixing that number becomes the goal, not fixing the underling risk.

Again, this is a good article. Read it. Agree with it. Gnash your teeth that you can't do the things it suggests and that your board would never go for it. Or, more likely, your board will never know this is an option because the C-level execs are too terrified of rocking the boat.

#InfoSec #Metrics #GRC #CyberSecurity #VulnerabilityMetrics #ITRisk #ITRiskManagement #ITSecurity #CyberRisk #CyberRiskManagement

Windows 11 Patch Fallout: When Micro$lop Tells You to Uninstall a Security Update

2,128 words, 11 minutes read time.

Micro$lop has issued an unprecedented recommendation for Windows 11 users: uninstall the KB5074109 update. The announcement alone was enough to make IT and security teams sit up straight, because it’s almost unheard of for the vendor to tell organizations to roll back a security patch. Released in January 2026, the update was intended to fix several critical vulnerabilities and enhance overall system stability. Instead, it caused immediate operational disruptions that caught enterprises off guard, turning what should have been routine patching into a high-pressure crisis.

End users began reporting a cascade of issues almost immediately. Outlook crashes became common, with POP and PST profiles hanging indefinitely, black screens appeared during shutdowns, and Remote Desktop sessions failed without warning. Teams relying on remote access suddenly found themselves cut off from critical systems, while internal applications that integrated with Windows components started behaving unpredictably. The disruption extended across both desktops and servers, making it clear that this was not a minor glitch but a systemic problem that could affect productivity and business continuity.

For organizations, the fallout created a brutal operational and security dilemma. Leaving the patch installed meant dealing with constant system failures, frustrated users, and potential data loss. Rolling it back, however, reopened critical security holes and exposed endpoints to known vulnerabilities, leaving them theoretically vulnerable to cyberattacks. This rare advisory illustrates the complexity of enterprise patch management, highlighting how even a trusted vendor update can force security teams into high-stakes decision-making that balances operational continuity, threat modeling, and risk management under pressure.

Patch KB5074109: Why Security Teams Are Concerned

KB5074109 was designed to fix security flaws and enhance system stability, yet it introduced critical failures immediately after deployment. Outlook POP and PST profiles hung completely, third-party applications malfunctioned, and Remote Desktop services became unreliable. Emergency fixes were issued by Micro$lop, but some issues persisted, forcing teams to act quickly to avoid widespread operational disruption. The situation illustrates how even trusted updates can inadvertently compromise productivity while attempting to enhance security.

The Risks of Uninstalling Security Updates

Security best practices have always emphasized the importance of applying patches promptly. Every unpatched system is an open invitation for attackers, and modern defense-in-depth strategies rely on layers of mitigation, with patches forming one of the most critical layers. A security update isn’t just a line in a change log—it’s a shield designed to close known vulnerabilities before adversaries can exploit them. From a theoretical standpoint, skipping or rolling back a patch is considered a serious risk, because every CVE left unpatched represents a potential foothold for threat actors.

Yet the KB5074109 scenario demonstrates that the real world doesn’t always align with theoretical best practices. When a patch itself begins breaking core business applications, freezing critical services, or causing unexpected downtime, the operational impact can suddenly outweigh the immediate benefits of security. Organizations are forced into a high-stakes calculation: leaving the patch in place risks productivity, user frustration, and potential financial loss, while rolling it back leaves endpoints exposed to known vulnerabilities. This is the kind of challenge that turns routine patching into a high-pressure risk management problem.

In these situations, effective threat modeling becomes essential. Security teams must identify which CVEs remain unpatched, understand which systems are most exposed, and determine what compensating controls—such as enhanced endpoint detection, network segmentation, or temporary access restrictions—can reduce risk. High-value systems, like those handling sensitive data or critical business operations, demand particular attention during a rollback. The balance between operational stability and security protection isn’t easy, but teams that think strategically and act deliberately are able to navigate this paradox without falling victim to either disruption or compromise.

Incident Response for Faulty Windows 11 Patches

Treating a problematic patch as a formal incident is essential, because the operational fallout can be just as dangerous as a security breach. When KB5074109 began causing crashes and black screens, IT and security teams were effectively thrust into emergency mode. Viewing the patch failure through the same lens as a malware outbreak or ransomware attack ensures that the response is structured, systematic, and focused on minimizing both operational disruption and security exposure. It’s no longer just a matter of uninstalling software—every step must be planned and executed with precision, with roles and responsibilities clearly assigned.

Monitoring telemetry becomes the first line of defense in this scenario. Failed logins, abnormal system behavior, crashes, and endpoint anomalies are early warning signs that indicate how widespread the issue is and which systems are most at risk. Teams that rely on centralized monitoring tools, such as SCCM, Intune, or advanced EDR dashboards, are able to map the impact quickly, triage the most critical failures, and prioritize response actions. Real-time visibility is invaluable, because the faster a team can understand the scope of the problem, the more effectively they can mitigate both operational and security risks.

Phased rollbacks, careful documentation, and transparent communication with leadership are the operational backbone of managing a patch incident. Rolling back a few pilot systems first allows teams to assess whether the rollback restores stability without introducing additional problems. Documentation ensures that every step is auditable and lessons are captured for future incidents, while leadership communication keeps stakeholders informed and sets expectations around downtime, risk exposure, and temporary mitigations. Complementary controls such as enhanced endpoint detection, network segmentation, and restricted access to sensitive resources help reduce exposure during the rollback period, allowing organizations to maintain both security hygiene and operational continuity.

Patch Management Strategy: Best Practices for Enterprise Security

Not all systems carry the same level of risk, and understanding that distinction is critical when deploying patches like KB5074109. Endpoints supporting critical applications, sensitive data repositories, or remote-access services represent high-value targets for attackers and high-impact points of failure for business operations. Treating every system identically during a rollout can amplify disruption and expose organizations to avoidable risk. Prioritizing deployments based on criticality, dependency, and threat exposure ensures that operational continuity is preserved while high-value systems receive the focused attention they require.

Phased rollouts provide an essential buffer against widespread failure. By deploying updates incrementally—starting with a small pilot group or non-critical endpoints—teams can observe how systems react, detect unexpected failures, and refine deployment procedures before the update reaches the broader enterprise. This approach allows IT and security teams to catch compatibility issues, application crashes, and endpoint anomalies early, minimizing the likelihood of mass disruptions. Telemetry and monitoring feed directly into this phased approach, supplying real-time data on system health, performance degradation, and user-impact metrics that inform immediate corrective action.

Equally important is maintaining robust rollback procedures and structured feedback channels with Micro$lop. When a patch introduces instability, clear rollback protocols enable teams to restore affected systems efficiently, while structured reporting ensures that the vendor is aware of critical failures and can prioritize fixes in future updates. The KB5074109 incident highlights a larger lesson for enterprise security: planning for unexpected failures is not optional. Teams must balance operational continuity with cybersecurity hygiene, relying on careful monitoring, strategic prioritization, and proactive communication to navigate the inherent risks of patch management.

Threat Modeling and Compensating Controls

When a security update fails, threat modeling becomes the guiding framework for making informed decisions under pressure. Not every vulnerability exposed by a rollback carries the same level of risk, and understanding which weaknesses an attacker could realistically exploit is essential. High-value systems, sensitive databases, and critical services require immediate attention, while less critical endpoints may tolerate temporary exposure. Effective threat modeling allows security teams to prioritize actions, allocate resources efficiently, and focus mitigations where they matter most, rather than reacting blindly to every potential CVE.

Organizations can implement a variety of compensating controls while waiting for a stable patch release. Endpoint protection tools can be fine-tuned to catch exploit attempts targeting newly exposed vulnerabilities, while network segmentation limits lateral movement in the event of a breach. Access to sensitive systems can be restricted or elevated monitoring applied to critical workflows, giving teams additional time to assess risk without halting business operations. By layering these controls strategically, organizations reduce the window of exposure and maintain a defensive posture even in the absence of the intended patch.

These measures demonstrate that operational resilience is just as important as the patch itself. Applying an update is only one layer of a broader defense-in-depth strategy, and failures in deployment expose the limitations of relying solely on vendor releases. Security teams that combine threat modeling, compensating controls, and real-time monitoring are better equipped to navigate the paradox of maintaining security while mitigating disruption. The KB5074109 incident serves as a clear reminder that thoughtful planning, proactive risk assessment, and agile operational response are as critical to enterprise security as any patch.

Lessons Learned from KB5074109

KB5074109 serves as a stark case study in the complexity of patch management for modern enterprise environments. Applying updates is rarely as simple as clicking “install.” Enterprise networks are composed of heterogeneous systems, legacy applications, and high-value endpoints that do not always respond predictably to vendor-supplied patches. This incident illustrates that even a routine security update can cascade into operational chaos, forcing security teams to make difficult trade-offs between maintaining productivity and protecting systems from known vulnerabilities.

Security teams must be proactive in anticipating potential failures. Maintaining flexible rollback plans, staging updates in phased deployments, and leveraging telemetry for early detection are no longer optional—they are essential. Organizations that treat patches as potential operational hazards, rather than guaranteed improvements, are better prepared to act quickly when disruptions occur. Clear communication with leadership and cross-functional teams ensures that decisions are understood and coordinated, minimizing both confusion and risk during critical incidents.

Ultimately, the KB5074109 incident underscores a deeper truth about enterprise security: it is not just about applying patches on schedule. True security requires informed decision-making, situational awareness, and resilience under pressure. Teams that cultivate these qualities are equipped to navigate the unpredictable landscape of IT operations, respond effectively to unexpected disruptions, and preserve both security and operational continuity in the face of failures—even when those failures originate from the vendor itself.

Conclusion: Balancing Security and Stability in Windows 11

The KB5074109 disruption demonstrates that even updates from a trusted vendor like Micro$lop can introduce significant risks to operational continuity. No matter how routine a patch may seem, its deployment can reveal hidden dependencies, software conflicts, or unexpected failures that ripple through an organization’s IT infrastructure. This incident reminds security teams that trust in the vendor does not replace vigilance—every update must be approached with an understanding of potential impacts and a readiness to respond if systems behave unpredictably.

Balancing patch management with system stability is an ongoing challenge for enterprise IT. Security teams must combine threat modeling with continuous telemetry monitoring to identify which vulnerabilities remain exposed, which endpoints are at risk, and what compensating controls can mitigate threats while preserving business continuity. From tuning endpoint protection to implementing temporary network segmentation or access restrictions, these measures provide a layered defense that buys time until a stable patch or hotfix can be deployed. The key is strategic thinking: security is not simply about applying updates on schedule, but about making informed choices under pressure.

Ultimately, resilience, careful planning, and structured communication remain the most reliable tools for navigating unexpected disruptions. Organizations that cultivate these capabilities are better equipped to respond to patch failures, maintain security hygiene, and preserve operational continuity even when trusted updates go awry. KB5074109 is a clear reminder that security is as much about preparedness and adaptability as it is about technology—it is the teams, processes, and decision-making frameworks behind the screens that determine whether an enterprise can weather the storm.

Call to Action

If this breakdown helped you think a little clearer about the threats out there, don’t just click away. Subscribe for more no-nonsense security insights, drop a comment with your thoughts or questions, or reach out if there’s a topic you want me to tackle next. Stay sharp out there.

D. Bryan King

Sources

Windows 11 update KB5074109 breaking systems – Micro$lop urges uninstall
Micro$lop says uninstall KB5074109 to fix Outlook hang
Micro$lop tells you to uninstall latest Windows 11 update
Understanding the risks of uninstalling security updates — Micro$lop Support
How to uninstall a Windows Update — Micro$lop Support
Micro$lop confirms Windows 11 January 2026 Update issues
Windows 11 Update Issues Force User Choice
Security Implications of User Non‑compliance Behavior to Software Updates: A Risk Assessment Study
To Patch, or not To Patch? A Case Study of System Administrators

Disclaimer:

The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author. The information provided is based on personal research, experience, and understanding of the subject matter at the time of writing. Readers should consult relevant experts or authorities for specific guidance related to their unique situations.

#businessContinuityPlanning #CISOGuidance #compensatingControls #criticalVulnerabilities #defenseInDepth #emergencyRollback #endpointAnomalies #endpointProtection #enterpriseITManagement #enterpriseSecurity #highValueEndpoints #ITCommunication #ITIncidentResponse #ITLeadership #ITOperations #ITResilience #ITRiskManagement #KB5074109 #MicroLop #MicroLopPatchProblem #MicrosoftUpdateIssues #networkSegmentation #operationalContinuity #operationalRisk #OutlookCrashes #patchAdvisory #patchDeployment #patchFailureResponse #patchManagement #patchTesting #phasedRollout #RemoteDesktopFailures #rollbackProcedures #securityBestPractices #securityHygiene #securityOperations #securityPatchRisk #SOCTeams #softwareUpdateFailure #systemCrashesWindows #systemMonitoring #systemStability #telemetryMonitoring #ThreatModeling #uninstallWindowsUpdate #updateCrisis #updateFailures #updateHazards #updateRollback #updateStrategy #vulnerabilityMitigation #Windows11KB5074109 #Windows11Security #Windows11Update #WindowsPatchIssues

What Is a Supply Chain Attack? Lessons from Recent Incidents

924 words, 5 minutes read time.

I’ve been in computer programming with a vested interest in Cybersecurity long enough to know that your most dangerous threats rarely come through the obvious channels. It’s not always a hacker pounding at your firewall or a phishing email landing in an inbox. Sometimes, the breach comes quietly through the vendors, service providers, and software updates you rely on every day. That’s the harsh reality of supply chain attacks. These incidents exploit trust, infiltrating organizations by targeting upstream partners or seemingly benign components. They’re not theoretical—they’re real, costly, and increasingly sophisticated. In this article, I’m going to break down what supply chain attacks are, examine lessons from high-profile incidents, and share actionable insights for SOC analysts, CISOs, and anyone responsible for protecting enterprise assets.

Understanding Supply Chain Attacks: How Trusted Vendors Can Be Threat Vectors

A supply chain attack occurs when a threat actor compromises an organization through a third party, whether that’s a software vendor, cloud provider, managed service provider, or even a hardware supplier. The key distinction from conventional attacks is that the adversary leverages trust relationships. Your defenses often treat trusted partners as safe zones, which makes these attacks particularly insidious. The infamous SolarWinds breach in 2020 is a perfect example. Hackers injected malicious code into an update of the Orion platform, and thousands of organizations unknowingly installed the compromised software. From the perspective of a SOC analyst, it’s a nightmare scenario: alerts may look normal, endpoints behave according to expectation, and yet an attacker has already bypassed perimeter defenses. Supply chain compromises come in many forms: software updates carrying hidden malware, tampered firmware or hardware, and cloud or SaaS services used as stepping stones for broader attacks. The lesson here is brutal but simple: every external dependency is a potential attack vector, and assuming trust without verification is a vulnerability in itself.

Lessons from Real-World Supply Chain Attacks

History has provided some of the most instructive lessons in this area, and the pain was often widespread. The NotPetya attack in 2017 masqueraded as a routine software update for a Ukrainian accounting package but quickly spread globally, leaving a trail of destruction across multiple sectors. It was not a random incident—it was a strategic strike exploiting the implicit trust organizations placed in a single provider. Then came Kaseya in 2021, where attackers leveraged a managed service provider to distribute ransomware to hundreds of businesses in a single stroke. The compromise of one MSP cascaded through client systems, illustrating that upstream vulnerabilities can multiply downstream consequences exponentially. Even smaller incidents, such as a compromised open-source library or a misconfigured cloud service, can serve as a launchpad for attackers. What these incidents have in common is efficiency, stealth, and scale. Attackers increasingly prefer the supply chain route because it requires fewer direct compromises while yielding enormous operational impact. For anyone working in a SOC, these cases underscore the need to monitor not just your environment but the upstream components that support it, as blind trust can be fatal.

Mitigating Supply Chain Risk: Visibility, Zero Trust, and Preparedness

Mitigating supply chain risk requires a proactive, multifaceted approach. The first step is visibility—knowing exactly what software, services, and hardware your organization depends on. You cannot defend what you cannot see. Mapping these dependencies allows you to understand which systems are critical and which could serve as entry points for attackers. Second, you need to enforce Zero Trust principles. Even trusted vendors should have segmented access and stringent authentication. Multi-factor authentication, network segmentation, and least-privilege policies reduce the potential blast radius if a compromise occurs. Threat hunting also becomes crucial, as anomalies from trusted sources are often the first signs of a breach. Beyond technical controls, preparation is equally important. Tabletop exercises, updated incident response plans, and comprehensive logging equip teams to react swiftly when compromise is detected. For CISOs, it also means communicating supply chain risk clearly to executives and boards. Stakeholders must understand that absolute prevention is impossible, and resilience—rapid detection, containment, and recovery—is the only realistic safeguard.

The Strategic Imperative: Assume Breach and Build Resilience

The reality of supply chain attacks is unavoidable: organizations are connected in complex webs, and attackers exploit these dependencies with increasing sophistication. The lessons are clear: maintain visibility over your entire ecosystem, enforce Zero Trust rigorously, hunt for subtle anomalies, and prepare incident response plans that include upstream components. These attacks are not hypothetical scenarios—they are the evolving face of cybersecurity threats, capable of causing widespread disruption. Supply chain security is not a checkbox or a one-time audit; it is a mindset that prioritizes vigilance, resilience, and strategic thinking. By assuming breach, questioning trust, and actively monitoring both internal and upstream environments, security teams can turn potential vulnerabilities into manageable risks. The stakes are high, but so are the rewards for those who approach supply chain security with discipline, foresight, and a relentless commitment to defense.

Call to Action

If this breakdown helped you think a little clearer about the threats out there, don’t just click away. Subscribe for more no-nonsense security insights, drop a comment with your thoughts or questions, or reach out if there’s a topic you want me to tackle next. Stay sharp out there.

D. Bryan King

Sources

• CISA: Supply Chain Security Resources
• NIST SP 800-161: Supply Chain Risk Management Practices
• KrebsOnSecurity: Cybersecurity News & Analysis
• CrowdStrike: Threat Intelligence Reports
• Mandiant Threat Reports
• Schneier on Security
• Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)
• Black Hat Conference Talks
• DEF CON Conference Resources
• Academic Papers on Cybersecurity

Disclaimer:

The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author. The information provided is based on personal research, experience, and understanding of the subject matter at the time of writing. Readers should consult relevant experts or authorities for specific guidance related to their unique situations.

#anomalyDetection #attackVector #breachDetection #breachResponse #CISO #cloudSecurity #cyberattackLessons #cybersecurity #cybersecurityGovernance #cybersecurityIncident #cybersecurityMindset #cybersecurityPreparedness #cybersecurityResilience #cybersecurityStrategy #EndpointSecurity #enterpriseRiskManagement #enterpriseSecurity #hardwareCompromise #hardwareSecurity #incidentResponse #incidentResponsePlan #ITRiskManagement #ITSecurityPosture #ITSecurityStrategy #Kaseya #maliciousUpdate #MFASecurity #MSPSecurity #networkSegmentation #NotPetya #organizationalSecurity #perimeterBypass #ransomware #riskAssessment #SaaSRisk #securityAudit #securityControls #SOCAnalyst #SOCBestPractices #SOCOperations #softwareSecurity #softwareSupplyChain #softwareUpdateThreat #SolarWinds #supplyChainAttack #supplyChainMitigation #supplyChainRisk #supplyChainSecurityFramework #supplyChainVulnerabilities #thirdPartyCompromise #threatHunting #threatLandscape #trustedVendorAttack #upstreamCompromise #upstreamMonitoring #vendorDependency #vendorRiskManagement #vendorSecurity #vendorTrust #zeroTrust

Started my new role this week and so far its been pretty welcoming experience!

In my post-military life, I went from dipping my toes into FISMA/InfoSec controls into full on diving head first. I'm excited about the challenge but damn I'm ready for this corporate training to be over with

#ITRiskManagement
#FISMA
#ITAudit

Intro: I have been working in IT for 20+ years. Last few years in IT Risk & Security.

I am an introvert. So while I do enjoy interacting with others, I need time to wind down & be on my own every now & then.

Since Feb '22 work & private life has been greatly impacted by catching COVID. Up till today I have not recovered and am unable to work or have an active social life.

#Introduction #InformationSecurity #ITRiskManagement #Cybersecurity #CISSP
#Introvert #GTD #Lifehacking #Golf #PostCOVID