We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.
The cookies that are categorised as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ...
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyse the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customised advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyse the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.
Other uncategorised cookies are those that are being analysed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
Every second Tuesday of the month, Microsoft releases its security updates, and every second Tuesday, IT teams everywhere brace for the same routine: review what’s changed, test for breakages, and roll updates out before the window for exploitation gets too wide. For a lot of businesses without a structured process, “patch management” really means “wait for something to break, then patch reactively.”
The risk with this approach isn’t theoretical. Once a vulnerability is publicly disclosed, whether through the patch release itself or independent research, the time between disclosure and active exploitation in the wild has been shrinking for years. Attackers reverse-engineer patches to figure out exactly what was fixed, then build exploits targeting anyone who hasn’t applied the update yet. A delay of weeks, once considered reasonably safe, now leaves a meaningful window of exposure.
A proactive patch management process doesn’t mean blindly deploying every update the moment it’s released, untested patches occasionally cause their own problems. It means having a defined cadence: a testing window on a small pilot group, a defined rollout schedule for the wider estate, and clear ownership of who’s responsible for tracking what’s been applied where. Centralised patch management tooling (whether that’s Intune, WSUS, or a third-party RMM platform) makes this dramatically more manageable than manually tracking patch status across dozens or hundreds of endpoints.
The other half of the equation is visibility. It’s not enough to assume patches are being applied; you need reporting that confirms which devices are up to date and which have fallen behind, so gaps get caught before they become an incident rather than after.
None of this needs to be complicated, but it does need to be deliberate. If your current patching process is closer to “we’ll deal with it when something breaks” than a defined, monitored schedule, that’s a gap worth closing. Get in touch if you’d like help putting a proper patch management process in place.
Ready to stop firefighting Patch Tuesday? Talk to our team about putting a proactive patch management process in place.