Cybersecurity Best Practices and Risk Management Blog | HITRUST

The Third-Party Risk Crisis: Why the Old Playbook No Longer Works

Written by HITRUST | Dec 8, 2025 6:32:47 PM

Traditional third-party risk management (TPRM) practices may not keep pace as they often rely on manual, self-attested, and inconsistent methods. As vendor ecosystems expand and the frequency and cost of breaches rise, organizations need a new approach — one built on verified, standardized, and defensible assurance like that offered by HITRUST.

What’s driving the third-party risk crisis?

The modern enterprise depends on thousands of third parties for everything from IT infrastructure to cloud services and data processing. According to SecurityScorecard and Cyentia 2024, the average Global 2000 organization now manages over 8,000 vendors providing nearly 18,000 IT products and services, each representing a potential point of risk.

The impact is real.

  • 99% of Global 2000 organizations are connected to vendors that have experienced a cyber incident.
  • The average third-party breach costs $4.91 million (IBM 2025).

These numbers reveal a growing truth: Cybersecurity risk associated with the supply chain has become material to an enterprise. Even a single weak link can expose the entire ecosystem to breach and disruption.

Why is traditional TPRM challenging?

Legacy TPRM programs were designed for a simpler, slower world. Today, they rely on outdated processes that create friction, delay, and false confidence.

Old TPRM Approach

Modern Reality

Consequence

Manual questionnaires and spreadsheets

Thousands of vendors and complex data flows

Slow, inconsistent reviews

Self-attested vendor responses

No independent verification

False sense of security

Disconnected frameworks and formats

Diverse global standards

Difficult to compare or trust results

Human-intensive validation

Limited budgets and staff

Unsustainable at enterprise scale

These inefficiencies leave teams overwhelmed and unable to keep pace with expanding vendor ecosystems. Instead of reducing risk, traditional TPRM often becomes an administrative burden that delays procurement and frustrates vendors.

What happens when TPRM becomes a bottleneck?

For most enterprises, the TPRM process has turned into a roadblock. Assessments can take weeks or months, draining staff resources and stalling business. Vendors often repeatedly fill out lengthy questionnaires for every customer, creating frustration on both sides.

The result?

  • Procurement delays
  • Slower time-to-market for services that depend on vendors
  • Inconsistent risk visibility across vendors
  • Friction with vendors forced to repeat assessments

In short, traditional TPRM may create more noise than insight, leaving organizations vulnerable to the very risks they’re trying to mitigate.

What’s the better way to manage third-party risk?

Security-mature organizations are shifting from self-attested trust to validated assurance — a model that uses verified, standardized, and quality-controlled assessments to prove that vendor controls are effective.

Validated assurance eliminates redundancy, improves consistency, and provides defensible, audit-ready proof of compliance. Rather than taking vendors at their word, organizations gain confidence from independently verified results.

With validated assurance

  • Risk decisions are based on evidence, not assumptions.
  • Vendor reviews are faster and reusable.
  • Security teams spend less time chasing documentation and more time managing risk.

It’s not just a better way to assess. It’s a smarter way to trust.

How can you learn more?

To understand how validated assurance transforms vendor oversight from a reactive burden into a scalable model of trust, download our latest white paper: Redefining Third-Party Risk Management with the HITRUST Validated Assurance.

Learn how HITRUST empowers organizations to address the challenge of vendor risk management and stay resilient against the growing wave of third-party breaches.