Skip to content

Project case study

Vulnerability Management Program Implementation

Lab vulnerability management program with policy creation, stakeholder buy-in, authenticated scanning, prioritization, remediation, and verification.

Role alignment

Vulnerability Management Analyst

Executive summary

Lab vulnerability management program with policy creation, stakeholder buy-in, authenticated scanning, prioritization, remediation, and verification.

Hiring relevance

The vulnerability management project shows the ability to turn scan output into prioritized remediation, communicate risk clearly, and validate that fixes reduced exposure.

Full technical write-up available

This portfolio page summarizes the project for hiring review. Use the Evidence Links section to read the full technical write-up and review the supporting project artifacts.

32 to 4

Total Vulnerabilities

100%

Critical Reduction

92%

High Reduction

88%

Medium Reduction

Problem

The simulated organization began without an established vulnerability management policy or operating process. The project needed to move from an unmanaged baseline to a repeatable program with governance, scanning permission, prioritized remediation, and verification.

Environment / Tools

TenableAzure Cloud InfrastructureAzure Virtual MachinesPowerShellWindows Server

Approach

  1. 1Drafted a vulnerability management policy that defined scope, responsibilities, remediation timelines, and a stakeholder review path.
  2. 2Simulated stakeholder and server-team meetings to secure buy-in, adjust remediation expectations, and authorize credentialed scanning.
  3. 3Provisioned an intentionally vulnerable Windows Server environment in Azure and performed authenticated vulnerability scans with Tenable Nessus.
  4. 4Prioritized remediation work by impact and ease of remediation, including third-party software removal, insecure protocol and cipher hardening, guest account group membership, Windows updates, WinVerifyTrust validation, and outdated software cleanup.
  5. 5Packaged remediation scripts and scan reports for remediation teams, then validated each remediation round through follow-up scans.

Evidence

  • The project repository documents policy drafting, stakeholder buy-in, initial scan permission, authenticated scan results, remediation emails, CAB review, and seven scan exports.
  • The remediation workflow includes generating PowerShell scripts for Wireshark removal, insecure protocol and cipher remediation, guest account cleanup, Windows updates, WinVerifyTrust validation, and outdated software removal or updates.
  • The supporting CVE remediation mapping repository connects findings to Tenable plugin IDs, CVEs, CVE descriptions, remediation method, and script locations.
  • The scripts repository provides the remediation scripts referenced by the vulnerability-to-remediation mapping.

Evidence chain

  1. 1.Tenable authenticated scan identifies vulnerable findings
  2. 2.Finding is mapped to Tenable plugin ID and CVE details
  3. 3.CVE score and description support remediation context
  4. 4.Remediation method is identified as PowerShell or Bash
  5. 5.Mapping links to the specific remediation script
  6. 6.Follow-up scans validate remediation progress
  7. 7.Final trend data shows reduction from 32 to 4 findings

Result

The full remediation cycle reduced total vulnerabilities from 32 to 4 across seven scans. Critical vulnerabilities were eliminated, high vulnerabilities decreased from 12 to 1, and medium vulnerabilities decreased from 17 to 2.

What I learned

  • Vulnerability reduction depends as much on governance and stakeholder coordination as it does on technical scanning.
  • Authenticated scanning and follow-up validation provide the evidence needed to show whether remediation actually worked.
  • Prioritizing fixes by operational impact and remediation effort creates a practical path from baseline discovery to maintenance mode.