mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

To Patch or Not to Patch: Motivations, Challenges, and Implications for Cybersecurity

arXiv 2502.17703 ↗First posted 24 Feb 2025cs.CR cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As technology has become more embedded into our society, the security of modern-day systems is paramount. One topic which is constantly under discussion is that of patching, or more specifically, the installation of updates that remediate security vulnerabilities in software or hardware systems. This continued deliberation is motivated by complexities involved with patching; in particular, the various incentives and disincentives for organizations and their cybersecurity teams when deciding whether to patch. In this paper, we take a fresh look at the question of patching and critically explore why organizations and IT/security teams choose to patch or decide against it (either explicitly or due to inaction). We tackle this question by aggregating and synthesizing prominent research and industry literature on the incentives and disincentives for patching, specifically considering the human aspects in the context of these motives. Through this research, this study identifies key motivators such as organizational needs, the IT/security team's relationship with vendors, and legal and regulatory requirements placed on the business and its staff. There are also numerous significant reasons discovered for why the decision is taken not to patch, including limited resources (e.g., person-power), challenges with manual patch management tasks, human error, bad patches, unreliable patch management tools, and the perception that related vulnerabilities would not be exploited. These disincentives, in combination with the motivators above, highlight the difficult balance that organizations and their security teams need to maintain on a daily basis. Finally, we conclude by discussing implications of these findings and important future considerations.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2025.

Builds on

9 of 54 references.

References · 9

  1. 2024Teams of LLM Agents can Exploit Zero-Day Vulnerabilitiescited by 95
  2. 2024Large Language Model for Vulnerability Detection and Repair: Literature Review and the Road Aheadcited by 42
  3. 2023Exploring ChatGPT's Capabilities on Vulnerability Managementcited by 19
  4. 2020Software Security Patch Management -- A Systematic Literature Review of Challenges, Approaches, Tools and Practicescited by 4
  5. 2021Developing a cyber security culture: Current practices and future needscited by 3
  6. 2019Developing cybersecurity education and awareness programmes for Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)cited by 2
  7. 2022An Empirical Study of Automation in Software Security Patch Managementcited by 2
  8. 2025Generative Artificial Intelligence-Supported Pentesting: A Comparison between Claude Opus, GPT-4, and Copilotcited by 2
  9. 2024Towards the generation of hierarchical attack models from cybersecurity vulnerabilities using language modelscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.