Why Continuous Monitoring Is Replacing Point-in-Time Audits for Compliance
Keeping pace with cybersecurity regulations in 2025 isn’t just about annual audits. It’s about real-time visibility across your entire supply chain. And that’s not just a fringe expectation for some industries. It’s increasingly a requirement across sectors as compliance frameworks and regulations evolve to meet present-day threats and attackers exploit third-party access.
To meet the moment, organizations need to align cybersecurity and compliance programs more closely. That means formalizing third-party risk management (TPRM) practices and adopting continuous oversight to reduce risk and align with evolving regulatory expectations.
Devaney Devoe, Senior Product Marketing Manager, Perry Robinson, Senior Solutions Architect, and Phil Marshall, Compliance Consultant at 41 Off, recently discussed how compliance teams can adjust their compliance programs as regulations evolve and supply chains continue to expand.
Read their takeaways below, or watch the full webinar here.
Why Continuous Monitoring Is No Longer Optional
Robinson said organizations can’t rely on one-time audits because attackers constantly adjust their tactics and third-party risks shift daily. While monthly or annual audits help validate compliance, they fall short of addressing fast-moving threats, he emphasized.
Compliance today doesn’t prevent a breach tomorrow—especially if attackers exploit gaps before the next audit.
“At the end of the day, a point in time audit is just that: It’s a point in time audit. That’s great for compliance, right? ‘Box checked, you’re done.’ But—you’re not secure.”
— Perry Robinson, Senior Solutions Architect, SecurityScorecard
A snapshot of your organization’s security posture and compliance does not guarantee future security and compliance and only leaves you vulnerable. “In order to remain secure, I need to do continuous monitoring to ensure that all of those checks and balances that I had in place on January 1st are going to be in place for the rest of the 365 days of the year—not only for myself, but also for my entire supply chain,” Robinson said.
Inherited Risk Is Sabotaging Your Checks and Balances
In addition to adopting continuous monitoring, organizations need to continuously take stock of their third parties’ cybersecurity and compliance risks in order to keep pace with regulatory frameworks in 2025.
The disappearance of a clear network perimeter is driving this trend. Growing data interconnectivity through shared infrastructure and increased reliance on Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and third parties means that compliance risks are no longer confined to internal systems, Marshall pointed out.
And third-party dependencies now drive a growing share of security and compliance risk. (SecurityScorecard’s 2025 Global Third-Party Breach Report found that over 35% of breaches originate from third parties.) Security and compliance teams must consider the entire ecosystem of inherited risk now:
- Marshall, Robinson, and Devoe discussed how the real danger lies not just in missing a regulatory check box, but in the operational, reputational, and financial fallout of third-party breaches.
- Whether it’s leaked credentials, unpatched vulnerabilities, or exposed data, the consequences—and how your organization handles the fallout—can be severe, from SEC sanctions, to losing the ability to process credit card payments.
SecurityScorecard embeds compliance into the very structure of its platform. The platform allows organizations to map controls directly to standards and regulations, apply continuous monitoring, and assess vendors before sending questionnaires. This gives risk teams “x-ray vision” into compliance postures across the supply chain.
Weaving in Third-Party Risk Management
Robinson has seen a true evolution in third-party risk management (TPRM) and its adoption across sectors over the past several years. Robinson previously initiated the third-party risk management program at Oracle. But at the time, not many organizations were on board.
“Back when I founded the TPRM or third-party risk management program at Oracle about 15 years ago, I was an evangelist. I was crying out into the wilderness. And very few, if any, regulations actually included a requirement for third-party risk,” Robinson said, adding that now TPRM is an integral part of many frameworks and regulations.
Whether it’s DORA’s new third-party risk management requirement, PCI DSS applying to third-party service providers, or other frameworks like GDPR and HIPAA reflecting the urgency of third-party risk, the writing is on the wall: TPRM is a formal part of compliance, not a suggested best practice.
Compliance and Security Must Work Hand-in-Hand
Zooming out, Marshall stressed that cybersecurity and compliance professionals need to stop treating cybersecurity and compliance as separate lanes, particularly as many of the same controls—such as credential and access management, continuous monitoring, and incident reporting—appear across requirements.
Marshall emphasized that siloed teams duplicate efforts and weaken resilience. He recommends real-time, cross-functional collaboration grounded in shared data.
“Organizations really need to approach compliance and cybersecurity in a continuous, collaborative way. They need to focus on real-time data, risk prioritization around that data, and finally, cross business and third-party collaboration.”
— Phil Marshall, Compliance Consultant at 41 Off
Trust and Verify with SecurityScorecard
Perry demonstrated how SecurityScorecard’s platform enables security and compliance teams to map their organization and vendors to compliance frameworks and regulations of interest. By highlighting risk signals that conflict with compliance claims, SecurityScorecard enables security teams to prioritize which vendors require follow-up.
- For each issue, SecurityScorecard enables teams to “trust and verify” vendors’ questionnaire answers by adding external, real-time data, such as misconfigurations or leaked credentials, to provide essential context. This prevents mismatched claims and wasted follow-up cycles.
- The platform also enables risk teams to assess incident likelihood based on real-world signals—not just static risk ratings—giving risk teams the insights they need to act before a breach occurs.
For organizations in need of additional capacity, SecurityScorecard’s MAX managed service can provide full-spectrum support—triaging vendor risks, generating incident likelihood assessments, and ensuring alignment to the most relevant frameworks.
MAX can support organizations at any stage of maturity. Whether an organization has a full TPRM team or is just starting its TPRM journey, MAX can adapt accordingly.
“Regardless of where you’re at in your maturity, compliance is important. Continuous monitoring is important. And so if that feels overwhelming, we can meet you where you’re at.”
— Devaney Devoe, Senior Product Marketing Manager, SecurityScorecard
Simplify Compliance with MAX
To keep pace with compliance in 2025, organizations must implement continuous monitoring that covers not just internal environments, but also digital supply chains. Because bad actors are always looking for the path of least resistance, and increasingly, that is your vendors.
Threat actors exploit weaknesses year-round, and misconfigured systems, leaked credentials, and vulnerable vendors can appear at any time. Continuous monitoring helps detect risks before they escalate. SecurityScorecard’s managed service was built with this assumption in mind to help you and your teams get ahead of risks and stay compliant on a continuous basis.
Want to learn how SecurityScorecard can help simplify compliance for your organization? Watch the full webinar here, and explore how MAX can help you take control of your digital supply chain.
