In today’s hyper-connected digital environment, organizations are not only responsible for their internal cybersecurity posture but also for the vast network of third parties with whom they share data and access. Vendors, suppliers, contractors, and service providers often have direct or indirect access to critical systems, making them an attractive target for threat actors. As a result, third-party monitoring is no longer optional—it’s a critical component of enterprise risk management.
However, traditional approaches to third-party risk management (TPRM) are struggling to keep pace. Static assessments, periodic audits, and spreadsheet-based evaluations offer only a snapshot of risk at a single point in time. What’s needed is an evolved, real-time, dynamic approach—one that leverages continuous intelligence to provide up-to-the-minute insights into the cybersecurity posture of every external party an organization relies on.
Continuous Intelligence: A Game-Changer in Cyber Risk Monitoring
Continuous intelligence (CI) refers to the real-time aggregation and analysis of data to drive proactive decision-making. Unlike conventional analytics that are often retrospective, CI operates continuously, processing streaming data and identifying risks as they emerge. In the context of third-party monitoring, this means organizations can detect vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, breaches, and compliance gaps across their vendor ecosystem before they evolve into major incidents.
A 2023 report from Gartner underscores the shift towards real-time monitoring, noting that by 2027, over 60% of large enterprises will require continuous cybersecurity assessments of third-party vendors, up from less than 15% in 2022. This change is being driven by an increase in supply chain attacks, regulatory scrutiny, and the complexity of vendor relationships in cloud-first environments.
By integrating CI into third-party risk management, companies move from reactive defense to proactive resilience. The result is a more adaptive, responsive, and intelligent approach to managing external cyber risk.
Why Static Assessments Are Failing
Static third-party risk assessments—often completed annually or bi-annually—are inherently flawed in the modern digital age. Threat actors don’t operate on a schedule, and vendor risk postures can change overnight due to factors like zero-day vulnerabilities, ransomware attacks, or insider threats. Waiting months between assessments creates dangerous blind spots.
For example, a vendor may appear compliant and secure during an annual audit, but a change in their infrastructure six months later—such as the use of an unpatched VPN or a misconfigured database—can open the door to cyberattacks. Without continuous monitoring, these changes go unnoticed until it’s too late.
The infamous SolarWinds supply chain attack illustrates this point. Threat actors inserted malicious code into legitimate software updates, compromising thousands of organizations globally. Regular risk assessments would not have caught the breach in time. A continuous intelligence-driven approach, however, could have identified the anomalous network behavior associated with the update and raised red flags.
Integrating Threat Intelligence and Behavioral Analytics
The foundation of effective CI-powered monitoring lies in the quality and breadth of data sources. Behavioral analytics, threat intelligence feeds, vulnerability scans, and open-source intelligence (OSINT) all play a role in developing a comprehensive risk profile. When these inputs are combined with machine learning and advanced analytics, organizations can detect subtle anomalies that would otherwise go unnoticed.
By applying behavioral analytics to network traffic or access patterns of third-party vendors, it’s possible to flag suspicious activities—such as unauthorized access to sensitive systems or unusual data transfer volumes. Similarly, monitoring public breach data and dark web forums can reveal whether a vendor’s credentials or internal data have been compromised.
Here, Black Kite has emerged as a prominent player in third-party risk monitoring. While this article does not serve as an endorsement, platforms like Black Kite use CI to evaluate vendor security postures through external attack surface analysis, compliance assessments, and threat intelligence. Their model illustrates how continuous monitoring is being operationalized in real-world settings.
Regulatory Drivers and Compliance Considerations
Regulators across the globe are ramping up requirements for vendor oversight. In the United States, Executive Order 14028 on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity places an emphasis on secure software supply chains. Similarly, the European Union’s NIS2 Directive extends security obligations to critical infrastructure operators and their supply chains.
Financial institutions, in particular, are facing increased pressure. The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) has released guidance urging banks to implement continuous oversight of vendors, particularly those with access to sensitive data or operational systems.
Continuous intelligence enables organizations to remain compliant with these evolving regulations by providing automated, real-time documentation of third-party risk posture. This capability is crucial for audit readiness and demonstrating due diligence in case of a breach.
Risk Scoring and Prioritization
Not all vendors carry the same level of risk. A small SaaS provider with access to sensitive customer data presents a different threat profile than a logistics company with limited system access. One of the major benefits of CI is its ability to continuously score and prioritize third-party risks based on changing threat conditions.
Risk-based prioritization helps security teams allocate resources efficiently, focusing on the highest-risk vendors while maintaining broader visibility across the entire supply chain. Instead of treating all third parties equally, CI allows for a tiered response—where high-risk vendors receive more frequent reviews, additional access controls, or even contractual security requirements.
Tools such as Black Kite contribute to this prioritization process by providing dynamic ratings derived from over 400 control points, mapped against globally recognized frameworks like NIST, ISO, and GDPR. These ratings serve as a baseline for comparing vendors and tracking their security performance over time.
The Role of Automation in Continuous Monitoring
Manual oversight of hundreds or thousands of third-party relationships is not scalable. Automation is essential to realize the full potential of continuous intelligence. From real-time alerting to automatic compliance checks and risk scoring, automation reduces the burden on security teams and ensures consistency in risk evaluation.
For instance, if a vendor’s TLS certificate expires or a new vulnerability is discovered in their public-facing assets, automated monitoring systems can trigger alerts immediately. This allows for swift remediation, communication with the vendor, or temporary suspension of access—actions that would take days or weeks using traditional methods.
Automated playbooks can also streamline the response process, ensuring that each identified risk is followed by a consistent set of actions based on severity and vendor tier. Over time, these playbooks improve operational efficiency and institutionalize best practices.
Data-Driven Decision Making
Perhaps the greatest advantage of CI is its ability to empower decision-makers with objective, timely data. Whether evaluating a new vendor, renewing a contract, or conducting a post-incident review, access to accurate and real-time insights is invaluable.
Board members and executives are increasingly asking for quantifiable metrics around third-party risk. CI delivers these metrics in the form of dashboards, reports, and risk scores that are easy to interpret and align with broader business objectives. This visibility not only supports security decisions but also helps justify investments in risk mitigation.
When considering third-party risk at the enterprise level, decisions must be based on more than gut feeling or historical performance. Platforms like Black Kite, through their emphasis on transparent and continuously updated data, exemplify how risk insights can become a strategic asset rather than just a compliance checkbox.
Challenges and Considerations
While CI offers clear benefits, it’s not without challenges. Organizations must ensure that their CI platforms are integrated into broader risk management and governance structures. False positives, data privacy concerns, and overreliance on automated scoring without human oversight can all undermine the effectiveness of third-party monitoring.
Additionally, vendors may be hesitant to undergo continuous evaluation, especially if it impacts their reputation or contract eligibility. Transparency, communication, and collaborative remediation are key to building a sustainable and trusted TPRM program powered by CI.
Furthermore, organizations should be cautious of tool sprawl. Adding yet another platform without a clear strategy for integration and usage can create silos rather than insights. CI should complement—not replace—core security processes such as incident response, identity management, and endpoint protection.
Looking Ahead: The Future of CI-Powered TPRM
As cyber threats evolve and supply chains grow more complex, continuous intelligence will become a standard—not a differentiator—in third-party monitoring. Organizations that fail to adapt risk being blindsided by breaches that originate not within their own walls, but through trusted partners.
The shift is already underway. Analysts predict that CI will become embedded into broader risk management platforms, enabling a unified view of enterprise risk across internal and external domains. Advanced AI models, improved data sharing between organizations, and sector-specific threat modeling will further enhance the precision of CI.
Platforms like Black Kite represent an important step in this journey, offering a glimpse into what effective, scalable, and data-driven third-party risk management can look like in the future.
In this landscape, the organizations that succeed will be those that treat risk as a living, breathing entity—one that demands continuous attention, adaptation, and action.
