SECURITY leaders must translate data into business relevance, and the article argues that the board cares about financial exposure rather than vulnerability counts. It notes that CVSS measures theoretical severity but not likelihood or impact for a given environment, emphasising how two similar issues can carry very different business consequences.
The piece highlights the FAIR model, which defines risk as a combination of loss event frequency and probable loss magnitude, and shows how Active Risk in InsightVM can anchor the likelihood side with observed attacker behaviour to produce a financial exposure figure.
A practical example compares a CVSS 9.8 vulnerability on a segmented guest Wi‑Fi router with a moderate CVSS issue on an internet-facing customer database, illustrating how the latter can drive greater annualised exposure—about $710,000 for a single vulnerability, versus around $2,500 for the former. The overall message is that once risk is expressed in financial terms, vulnerability management shifts from volume to targeted reduction, guiding budget and prioritisation in line with business objectives. 20 March 2026