building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking

Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.

16 stars

Best use case

building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.

Teams using building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.

When to use this skill

  • You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.

When not to use this skill

  • You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
  • You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.

Installation

Claude Code / Cursor / Codex

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/plurigrid/asi/main/plugins/asi/skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking Compares

Feature / Agentbuilding-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-trackingStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.

Where can I find the source code?

You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.

SKILL.md Source

# Building Vulnerability Aging and SLA Tracking

## Overview
With over 30,000 new vulnerabilities identified in 2024 (a 17% increase from the prior year), organizations must track how long vulnerabilities remain unpatched and whether remediation occurs within defined Service Level Agreements (SLAs). Vulnerability aging measures the time between discovery and remediation, while SLA tracking enforces severity-based deadlines. Industry benchmarks indicate standard SLAs of 14 days for critical, 30 days for high, 60 days for medium, and 90 days for low vulnerabilities, though more aggressive timelines (24-48 hours for actively exploited critical CVEs) are increasingly common. This skill covers designing SLA policies, building aging dashboards, implementing automated escalations, and generating compliance metrics.


## When to Use

- When deploying or configuring building vulnerability aging and sla tracking capabilities in your environment
- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements
- When building or improving security architecture for this domain
- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation

## Prerequisites
- Vulnerability management platform with historical scan data
- Asset inventory with criticality ratings
- ITSM/ticketing system for remediation tracking
- Reporting platform (Splunk, Elastic, Power BI, Grafana)
- Stakeholder agreement on SLA timelines and escalation procedures

## Core Concepts

### Standard Vulnerability SLA Framework

| Severity | CVSS Range | Standard SLA | Aggressive SLA | CISA KEV SLA |
|----------|-----------|-------------|----------------|-------------|
| Critical | 9.0-10.0 | 14 days | 48 hours | BOD 22-01 due date |
| High | 7.0-8.9 | 30 days | 7 days | 14 days |
| Medium | 4.0-6.9 | 60 days | 30 days | N/A |
| Low | 0.1-3.9 | 90 days | 60 days | N/A |
| Informational | 0.0 | Best effort | Best effort | N/A |

### Adaptive SLA Modifiers

| Factor | Modifier | Rationale |
|--------|----------|-----------|
| Internet-facing asset | -50% SLA | Higher exposure risk |
| CISA KEV listed | Override to 48h | Active exploitation confirmed |
| EPSS > 0.7 | -50% SLA | High exploitation probability |
| Tier 1 (crown jewel) asset | -25% SLA | Maximum business impact |
| Compensating control in place | +25% SLA | Risk partially mitigated |
| Vendor patch unavailable | Exception with review date | Cannot remediate yet |

### Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

| KPI | Formula | Target |
|-----|---------|--------|
| Mean Time to Remediate (MTTR) | Avg(remediation_date - discovery_date) | < 30 days overall |
| SLA Compliance Rate | (Vulns remediated within SLA / Total vulns) * 100 | >= 90% |
| Overdue Vulnerability Count | Count where age > SLA | Trending downward |
| Vulnerability Aging Distribution | Count by age bucket (0-14d, 15-30d, 31-60d, 60+d) | Majority in 0-30d |
| Remediation Velocity | Vulns closed per week | Trending upward |
| Exception Rate | (Exceptions / Total vulns) * 100 | < 5% |

## Workflow

### Step 1: Define SLA Policy Document

```
Vulnerability Remediation SLA Policy v1.0

1. Scope: All information systems and applications
2. Severity Classification: Based on CVSS v4.0/v3.1 base score
3. SLA Timelines: See Standard SLA Framework table
4. Adaptive Modifiers: Applied based on asset context
5. Exception Process:
   - Must be documented with business justification
   - Requires compensating control description
   - Maximum extension: 90 days (one renewal)
   - CISO approval required for Critical/High exceptions
6. Escalation Path:
   - 50% SLA elapsed: Automated reminder to asset owner
   - 75% SLA elapsed: Escalation to manager
   - 100% SLA elapsed (overdue): CISO notification
   - 120% SLA elapsed: VP/CTO escalation
7. Metrics Reporting: Monthly to security committee
```

### Step 2: Build the Aging Calculation Engine

```python
import pandas as pd
from datetime import datetime, timedelta

class VulnerabilityAgingTracker:
    """Track vulnerability aging and SLA compliance."""

    SLA_DAYS = {
        "Critical": 14,
        "High": 30,
        "Medium": 60,
        "Low": 90,
    }

    def __init__(self, sla_overrides=None):
        if sla_overrides:
            self.SLA_DAYS.update(sla_overrides)

    def calculate_aging(self, vulns_df):
        """Calculate aging metrics for each vulnerability."""
        today = datetime.now()

        vulns_df["discovery_date"] = pd.to_datetime(vulns_df["discovery_date"])
        vulns_df["remediation_date"] = pd.to_datetime(
            vulns_df["remediation_date"], errors="coerce"
        )

        vulns_df["age_days"] = vulns_df.apply(
            lambda row: (row["remediation_date"] - row["discovery_date"]).days
            if pd.notna(row["remediation_date"])
            else (today - row["discovery_date"]).days,
            axis=1
        )

        vulns_df["sla_days"] = vulns_df["severity"].map(self.SLA_DAYS)
        vulns_df["sla_deadline"] = vulns_df["discovery_date"] + \
            pd.to_timedelta(vulns_df["sla_days"], unit="D")

        vulns_df["is_overdue"] = vulns_df.apply(
            lambda row: row["age_days"] > row["sla_days"]
            if pd.isna(row["remediation_date"]) else False,
            axis=1
        )

        vulns_df["sla_compliance"] = vulns_df.apply(
            lambda row: row["age_days"] <= row["sla_days"]
            if pd.notna(row["remediation_date"]) else None,
            axis=1
        )

        vulns_df["days_overdue"] = vulns_df.apply(
            lambda row: max(0, row["age_days"] - row["sla_days"])
            if row["is_overdue"] else 0,
            axis=1
        )

        vulns_df["sla_pct_elapsed"] = (
            vulns_df["age_days"] / vulns_df["sla_days"] * 100
        ).round(1)

        return vulns_df

    def generate_kpis(self, vulns_df):
        """Generate KPI summary from aging data."""
        open_vulns = vulns_df[vulns_df["remediation_date"].isna()]
        closed_vulns = vulns_df[vulns_df["remediation_date"].notna()]

        kpis = {
            "total_vulnerabilities": len(vulns_df),
            "open_vulnerabilities": len(open_vulns),
            "closed_vulnerabilities": len(closed_vulns),
            "overdue_count": open_vulns["is_overdue"].sum(),
            "mttr_days": closed_vulns["age_days"].mean() if len(closed_vulns) > 0 else 0,
            "sla_compliance_rate": (
                closed_vulns["sla_compliance"].mean() * 100
                if len(closed_vulns) > 0 else 0
            ),
        }

        kpis["overdue_by_severity"] = (
            open_vulns[open_vulns["is_overdue"]]
            .groupby("severity")
            .size()
            .to_dict()
        )

        return kpis

    def get_escalation_list(self, vulns_df):
        """Get vulnerabilities requiring escalation."""
        open_vulns = vulns_df[vulns_df["remediation_date"].isna()].copy()

        escalations = []
        for _, vuln in open_vulns.iterrows():
            pct = vuln["sla_pct_elapsed"]
            if pct >= 120:
                level = "VP/CTO Escalation"
            elif pct >= 100:
                level = "CISO Notification"
            elif pct >= 75:
                level = "Manager Escalation"
            elif pct >= 50:
                level = "Owner Reminder"
            else:
                continue

            escalations.append({
                "cve_id": vuln.get("cve_id", ""),
                "severity": vuln["severity"],
                "age_days": vuln["age_days"],
                "sla_days": vuln["sla_days"],
                "days_overdue": vuln["days_overdue"],
                "sla_pct": pct,
                "escalation_level": level,
                "asset": vuln.get("asset", ""),
                "owner": vuln.get("owner", ""),
            })

        return pd.DataFrame(escalations)
```

### Step 3: Dashboard Visualization

```python
# Grafana/Kibana query examples for vulnerability aging

# Age distribution histogram (Elasticsearch)
age_distribution_query = {
    "aggs": {
        "age_buckets": {
            "range": {
                "field": "age_days",
                "ranges": [
                    {"key": "0-7 days", "to": 8},
                    {"key": "8-14 days", "from": 8, "to": 15},
                    {"key": "15-30 days", "from": 15, "to": 31},
                    {"key": "31-60 days", "from": 31, "to": 61},
                    {"key": "61-90 days", "from": 61, "to": 91},
                    {"key": "90+ days", "from": 91},
                ]
            }
        }
    }
}

# SLA compliance trend (monthly)
sla_trend_query = {
    "aggs": {
        "monthly": {
            "date_histogram": {"field": "remediation_date", "interval": "month"},
            "aggs": {
                "within_sla": {
                    "filter": {"script": {
                        "source": "doc['age_days'].value <= doc['sla_days'].value"
                    }}
                }
            }
        }
    }
}
```

## Best Practices
1. Start with achievable SLA targets and tighten them as processes mature
2. Adapt SLAs based on asset criticality and threat context, not just CVSS scores
3. Automate escalation notifications to reduce manual tracking overhead
4. Track MTTR trends month-over-month to demonstrate improvement
5. Build exception workflows that require documented compensating controls
6. Report SLA compliance to executive leadership monthly for accountability
7. Include aging metrics in security committee and board-level reporting
8. Integrate SLA tracking with ITSM ticketing for end-to-end remediation visibility

## Common Pitfalls
- Setting unrealistic SLA targets that teams cannot meet, causing SLA fatigue
- Not adapting SLAs for asset criticality, treating all systems equally
- Lacking exception processes, forcing teams to either ignore SLAs or request blanket waivers
- Measuring only open vulnerability count without considering age and SLA compliance
- Not tracking the SLA clock from discovery date (using report date instead)
- Failing to re-baseline SLAs as team maturity improves

## Related Skills
- implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla
- building-executive-vulnerability-risk-report
- implementing-security-metrics-and-kpis
- performing-remediation-validation-scanning

Related Skills

triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework

16
from plurigrid/asi

Triage and prioritize vulnerabilities using CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree framework to produce actionable remediation priorities.

triaging-security-incident

16
from plurigrid/asi

Performs initial triage of security incidents to determine severity, scope, and required response actions using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Classifies incidents by type, assigns priority based on business impact, and routes to appropriate response teams. Activates for requests involving incident triage, security alert classification, severity assessment, incident prioritization, or initial incident analysis.

triaging-security-incident-with-ir-playbook

16
from plurigrid/asi

Classify and prioritize security incidents using structured IR playbooks to determine severity, assign response teams, and initiate appropriate response procedures.

triaging-security-alerts-in-splunk

16
from plurigrid/asi

Triages security alerts in Splunk Enterprise Security by classifying severity, investigating notable events, correlating related telemetry, and making escalation or closure decisions using SPL queries and the Incident Review dashboard. Use when SOC analysts face queued alerts from correlation searches, need to prioritize investigation order, or must document triage decisions for handoff to Tier 2/3 analysts.

tracking-threat-actor-infrastructure

16
from plurigrid/asi

Threat actor infrastructure tracking involves monitoring and mapping adversary-controlled assets including command-and-control (C2) servers, phishing domains, exploit kit hosts, bulletproof hosting, a

testing-api-for-mass-assignment-vulnerability

16
from plurigrid/asi

Tests APIs for mass assignment (auto-binding) vulnerabilities where clients can modify object properties they should not have access to by including additional parameters in API requests. The tester identifies writable endpoints, adds undocumented fields to request bodies (role, isAdmin, price, balance), and checks if the server binds these to the data model without filtering. Part of OWASP API3:2023 Broken Object Property Level Authorization. Activates for requests involving mass assignment testing, parameter binding abuse, auto-binding vulnerability, or API over-posting.

substrate-vulnerability-scanner

16
from plurigrid/asi

Scans Substrate/Polkadot pallets for 7 critical vulnerabilities including arithmetic overflow, panic DoS, incorrect weights, and bad origin checks. Use when auditing Substrate runtimes or FRAME pallets. (project, gitignored)

signal-messaging

16
from plurigrid/asi

Signal Protocol MCP server (Rust). 3 tools — encrypt, initialize_session, verify_safety_number. Bypass route when Beeper Desktop is down.

performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage

16
from plurigrid/asi

Triage web application vulnerability findings from DAST/SAST scanners using OWASP risk rating methodology to separate true positives from false positives and prioritize remediation.

performing-vulnerability-scanning-with-nessus

16
from plurigrid/asi

Performs authenticated and unauthenticated vulnerability scanning using Tenable Nessus to identify known vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, default credentials, and missing patches across network infrastructure, servers, and applications. The scanner correlates findings with CVE databases and CVSS scores to produce prioritized remediation guidance. Activates for requests involving vulnerability scanning, Nessus assessment, patch compliance checking, or automated vulnerability detection.

performing-ssrf-vulnerability-exploitation

16
from plurigrid/asi

Test for Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerabilities by probing cloud metadata endpoints, internal network services, and protocol handlers through user-controllable URL parameters. Tests AWS/GCP/Azure metadata APIs (169.254.169.254), internal port scanning via HTTP, URL scheme bypass techniques, and DNS rebinding detection.

performing-ot-vulnerability-scanning-safely

16
from plurigrid/asi

Perform vulnerability scanning in OT/ICS environments safely using passive monitoring, native protocol queries, and carefully controlled active scanning with Tenable OT Security to identify vulnerabilities without disrupting industrial processes or crashing legacy controllers.