Table of contents
- What technical debt really is (and why it matters for security)
- When software is “business critical” and therefore untouchable
- Impossible patches: the paradox of operational security
- Contractual constraints that block security
- Workarounds: temporary solutions that become permanent
- Technical debt and the false sense of security
- The CISO’s perspective: knowing but not being able to act
- Modern attackers and systems of the past
- Why technical debt is a governance issue, not just an IT one
- Reducing risk without illusions
In the official language of enterprise cyber security, we often talk about zero trust, resilience, defense in depth, and AI-driven detection. But there is a term that rarely appears in board reports, strategic plans, or executive presentations: technical debt. And yet, this is precisely where one of the most dangerous enemies of modern organizations’ security is hiding.
Technical debt is not just a problem of efficiency, maintenance, or future costs. In the cyber domain, it is a risk multiplier. Silent, layered over time, often untouchable. And above all: known to everyone, but named by very few.
This article tackles the issue from a concrete and uncomfortable angle: how legacy choices, historical compromises, and “temporary” workarounds are turning into structural vulnerabilities in real-world organizations.
What technical debt really is (and why it matters for security)
Technical debt arises when a system is designed or modified by prioritizing speed, cost, or operational continuity over architectural quality. Over time, these shortcuts accumulate like interest on a loan that is never repaid.
From a cyber security perspective, the problem is not just that the code is “ugly” or hard to maintain. The problem is that it:
- cannot be securely updated
- cannot be properly observed
- cannot be isolated
- cannot be replaced without massive impact
In other words, it is not defensible according to current standards.
When software is “business critical” and therefore untouchable
One of the most common scenarios in mid-sized and large organizations is the presence of applications labeled as business critical: custom ERP systems, production platforms, industrial software, or vertical management tools developed 10 or 15 years ago.
The issue is not only the age of the software, but the fact that it:
- runs on operating systems that are no longer supported
- uses obsolete libraries
- is rigidly integrated with other legacy systems
- lacks adequate testing environments
When a critical vulnerability emerges, the response is not “let’s patch it,” but:
“We can’t update it: we risk stopping the business.”
The result is that the vulnerability remains, perhaps mitigated with a firewall rule, an IPS, or an improvised network segmentation. But the logical or technical flaw is still there, ready to be exploited.
Impossible patches: the paradox of operational security
From a theoretical standpoint, patching is one of the pillars of security.
From a real-world standpoint, it is often a minefield.
In many organizations:
- a patch cannot be applied without vendor approval
- the vendor does not guarantee compatibility
- the contract does not include frequent updates
- the maintenance window is almost non-existent
This leads to a paradoxical situation: security depends on not modifying the system.
Every patch becomes a greater operational risk than the vulnerability itself. And so it gets postponed. Month after month. CVE after CVE.
Meanwhile, attackers do not wait.
Contractual constraints that block security
Another rarely discussed aspect is the role of contracts in creating technical debt and cyber risk.
Many legacy systems are constrained by:
- closed licenses
- rigid SLAs
- conditional support
- mandatory use of specific versions
In these cases, the CISO knows the system is vulnerable, but lacks the contractual power to intervene.
Cyber risk thus becomes a legal and commercial problem, not just a technical one.
And it is often implicitly accepted, without a truly structured assessment.
Workarounds: temporary solutions that become permanent
When the root cause cannot be fixed, workarounds are built:
- compensating scripts
- hyper-specific firewall rules
- static whitelists
- exceptions in control systems
- “temporary” privileged access
The problem is not the workaround itself.
The problem is when it becomes a stable part of the architecture.
Over time:
- no one remembers why it exists
- no one dares to remove it
- no one measures its real impact
And what was meant to reduce risk turns into a structural vulnerability, often invisible to standard controls.
Technical debt and the false sense of security
One of the most dangerous effects of technical debt is the false perception of control.
Dashboards full of green, active SOCs, advanced tools… but beneath the surface:
- unpatchable systems
- incomplete logs
- encrypted traffic that is not inspected
- unmanaged legacy identities
Security is “layered on top of” fragile systems, instead of being integrated into the design.
This creates a reactive, not resilient, cyber security posture.
The CISO’s perspective: knowing but not being able to act
Many CISOs live with constant tension between responsibility and decision-making power.
They know that:
- certain systems are not defensible
- past choices weigh heavily today
- certain risks are unacceptable in the long term
But they collide with:
- business priorities
- budget constraints
- cultural resistance
- fear of change
Technical debt thus becomes the elephant in the room: everyone sees it, no one truly addresses it.
Modern attackers and systems of the past
There is another often underestimated aspect: attackers evolve faster than legacy systems.
Techniques such as:
- living off the land
- exploitation of known but unpatched vulnerabilities
- silent lateral movement
- abuse of legacy credentials
are particularly effective precisely in environments with high technical debt.
No sophisticated zero-day is required. It is enough to know the “old” environment well.
Why technical debt is a governance issue, not just an IT one
Addressing technical debt does not mean simply “rebuilding systems.”
It means:
- integrating technical risk into decision-making processes
- making the cost of inaction visible
- linking security, compliance, and operational continuity
- planning decommissioning, not just defense
As long as technical debt remains confined to IT, the problem will never truly be solved.
Reducing risk without illusions
It is not always possible to eliminate technical debt immediately. But it is always possible to manage it honestly.
Some realistic principles:
- map systems that are truly unpatchable
- explicitly declare residual risks
- minimize exposure as much as possible
- plan an exit strategy, even over the long term
True security is not pretending the problem does not exist, but governing it consciously.
Conclusion
Technical debt is the enemy no CISO wants to name, because it forces an uncomfortable truth into the open: not everything is defensible, not everything is under control, not everything can be solved with a new tool.
But as long as it remains hidden, it will continue to be the main silent cause of incidents, compromises, and cyber crises.
Mature cyber security does not come from perfect architectures, but from the ability to look one’s limits in the face. And technical debt is, today, one of the greatest limits of all.
