Remediation vs. Workaround vs. Mitigation in Cybersecurity: What’s the Difference and Why Does It Matter

In the field of vulnerability management, remediation, workaround, and mitigation are three common terms used to describe methods of addressing a vulnerability. They are sometimes used interchangeably, but their meanings can vary slightly across different vendors and organizations. To help with understanding the subtle differences between these terms—and how they are used—here’s a breakdown of how our team defines each. 

First, let’s look at the big picture. When talking about a vulnerability, one of the most important questions is if there is a method available to address it. We call those methods remediations.

Breaking Down Remediation

Remediation tends to be a catch-all term for anything that may address a vulnerability, and so it encompasses different categories of actions.Here’s how we break it down: 

Patches

Installing a patch for the vulnerable product is the most commonly-seen form of remediation. This action fixes the vulnerability by applying code updates designed to close the security gap. In OT (operational technology) environments, patches often require secondary validation by an OEM (original equipment manufacturer) to ensure they don’t negatively impact system functionality.

• Updating to a New Version: In some cases, remediation requires updating an operating system or other software to a newer version that addresses the vulnerability. A vendor may release a patch specifically to address one security issue, or they may periodically release “rollups”, or patches that contain fixes for several security issues.
  
  
• Flashing: For firmware on embedded devices,  applying new code is done by flashing the device. While a different process from installing a software update, the outcome is the same: after flashing, the device now has the new, secure version of the firmware.
  
  

Workarounds

A workaround is often used when a patch is unavailable or cannot be quickly applied. While it does not resolve the underlying issue in the code, a workaround helps reduce the exposure of a vulnerability by implementing steps that prevent exploitation. Workarounds can be short-term (i.e., reversed after patching) or long-term (i.e., maintained in place of a patch). 

• Network Configuration: If exploitation requires network access over a certain protocol, like Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP), blocking RDP access to the vulnerable device can be an effective way to prevent exploitation. 
• Restrictions: Disabling certain features or limiting access can help prevent attackers from exploiting known vulnerabilities. For example, if a vulnerability is tied to a VLAN feature on a network switch, disabling VLAN functionality until a patch is available could be an effective workaround. If VLAN is not necessary for normal operations, this could be a long-term strategy; if VLAN is instead required, this workaround might only be in place until a patch could be applied. 

Mitigations

A mitigation is focused on reducing the risk without fully eliminating the vulnerability. This approach does not necessarily prevent exploitation but instead makes the exploitation more difficult or less impactful. Mitigation can involve:

• Configuration and Deployment: Adjusting system configurations or deployments can significantly reduce risk. For example, changing default passwords to strong, unique ones is a common form of mitigation. Isolating an affected device as much as possible, using an alternate form of authentication, or changing the default port for a service are other examples of mitigations.
  
  
• General Security Practices: Many vendors and security experts recommend general security practices like restricting access to necessary personnel for a vulnerable device, performing network segmentation, or only downloading files from trusted sources. These would fall under the mitigation category—while they don’t address the underlying vulnerability, these actions could reduce the likelihood of it being exploited.
  
  

Upgrades

In cases where a product is no longer being updated, it may need to be replaced entirely with a newer product line. This could involve replacing end of life (EOL) devices with newer ones to ensure continued security and compliance. This can be especially tricky for operational technology due to the scale and long lifespan of operating equipment.

Differences Across Vendors: How Terms are Defined

Interestingly, remediation and mitigation are not always defined in the same way by every vendor. For instance, Schneider Electric uses the term “remediation” to refer specifically to a patch, whereas they define “mitigation” as any action that is not a patch but still serves to reduce the risk. Siemens uses the term “remediation” for any strategy to address a vulnerability, but they further distinguish a section for “Mitigations and Workarounds”, which contains any non-patch strategies. Rockwell Automation uses “Corrected Version” as the table header to display patched versions of vulnerable products, but they also include patches in a later section titled “Mitigations and Workarounds” alongside non-patch strategies. 

This distinction in terms is important to understand, especially when working with vendors that define remediation and mitigation differently. Depending on the vendor, what one company might consider a “remediation” could be classified as a “mitigation” by another. This can sometimes lead to confusion when aggregating vulnerability management strategies across multi-vendor environments.

However, there are valid arguments for why different vendors may choose to define these terms in different ways. One of the main reasons is that the cybersecurity landscape is complex, with diverse use cases, systems, and industries that require customized approaches. For example, a patch (which may be considered a form of remediation) could involve more intricate testing processes in highly regulated industries like healthcare or finance, where the risk of disrupting services is high.

CSAF (Common Security Advisory Framework)

CSAF provides a standard format through which to communicate security advisories, including information about remediation strategies. The CSAF specification document uses “remediation” as a catch-all and provides specific definitions for different types of remediation: 

• Mitigation: Suggestions to reduce risk without directly fixing the vulnerability.
• Workaround: Measures to avoid exposure to a vulnerability
• Vendor Fix: An official fix provided by the vendor to address the vulnerability, typically a patch.
• No Fix Planned: Indicates the vendor does not plan to release a fix, often due to product end-of-life (EOL).
• None Available: A fix or patch is not currently available, but one may be released at a later date.

Conclusion: Navigating the Terminology

Understanding remediation as an umbrella term and the categories within it is crucial for implementing effective cybersecurity strategies. While both terms aim to reduce risk, they can be categorized in very different ways. As vendors may use these terms differently, it’s important to clarify the terminology when working across different platforms to ensure that your cybersecurity strategy is as effective as possible.