Request Demo

AI Third-Party Risk Management

Third Party Risk Management (TPRM) - FortifyData

AI Auditing, Continuous Assessment, and Defensible Risk Decisions

According to the 2025 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report, 30% of breaches now involve third-party participation, double the rate from the prior year. Most of those breaches don’t happen because organizations skipped their vendor review. They happen because a vendor’s posture changed between reviews…and no one was watching.

FortifyData gives security and risk teams the continuous visibility, AI-powered analysis, and workflow automation to manage third-party risk at the speed and scale the threat environment actually demands.

Request a Demo

What Is Third-Party Risk Management?

Third-party risk management (TPRM) is the process organizations use to identify, assess, and continuously monitor the risks introduced by their external vendors, suppliers, service providers, and business partners. When a vendor has access to your systems, data, or operational infrastructure, their security posture becomes your exposure. TPRM is how organizations make that exposure visible and manageable.

What is Third-Party Risk Management? The scope of third-party risk is broader than most organizations initially recognize. It includes cybersecurity risk, the likelihood that a vendor’s systems are compromised or misconfigured in ways that create a pathway to your environment. It includes compliance risk, the possibility that a vendor’s practices put your organization in violation of regulations you’re accountable for. It includes operational risk, the chance that a vendor failure disrupts services you depend on. And it includes reputational risk, the fallout that follows when a vendor breach becomes your breach in the eyes of customers, regulators, and the press.

The consequences of inadequate TPRM are well documented. 54% of organizations experienced a third-party breach in the past year, and approximately 29% of all data breaches involve a third-party attack vector. The organizations behind those statistics almost always had a vendor review process in place. What they lacked was the continuous visibility to know when something changed between reviews.

What's Wrong with How Most Organizations do TPRM Today

The standard approach to third-party risk management was designed for a slower threat environment. Annual reviews, questionnaire-based assessments, and manual document review made sense when vendor relationships were fewer, threats evolved more slowly, and security teams had more time per vendor than they do now. That’s no longer the world security teams operate in.

The result is a set of structural gaps that exist in most TPRM programs regardless of how seriously the team takes its work:

  • Point-in-time assessments create false confidence. A vendor that passes an annual review in January can introduce significant new risk by March. Annual or even quarterly review cycles are not surveillance — they’re snapshots.
  • Questionnaire fatigue degrades quality on both sides. Security teams can’t read every questionnaire response with appropriate scrutiny. Vendors answer the same questions repeatedly with copy-paste responses. The signal-to-noise ratio is poor, and both parties know it.
  • Vendor claims can’t be validated. A vendor checks “yes” to MFA enforcement. You have no way to verify that answer against their actual environment without a separate technical assessment — which most teams don’t have the capacity to run for every vendor.
  • Evidence review doesn’t scale. SOC 2 reports run 60 to 200 pages. HECVATs are dense. Reviewing vendor documentation thoroughly for dozens or hundreds of vendors requires analyst hours that most teams simply don’t have.
  • Offboarding and fourth-party risk are largely unmanaged. Most programs have a reasonable handle on Tier 1 vendors. They have limited visibility into vendor-of-vendor relationships and inconsistent processes for closing out terminated relationships.


These aren’t process failures. They’re structural limitations of an approach that was built before continuous assessment was technically or economically feasible. The teams operating under these constraints aren’t doing TPRM wrong — they’re doing the best they can with tools that weren’t built for the volume or velocity of today’s vendor ecosystems.

The Third-Party Risk Management Lifecycle

Effective TPRM isn’t a single assessment, it’s a structured process that spans the entire vendor relationship, from initial evaluation through offboarding. Each stage serves a distinct purpose, and gaps at any stage create risk that compounds over time.

  1. Vendor Onboarding: Evaluate new vendors before they’re granted access to your systems, data, or network. Due diligence, risk tiering, and contract requirements are established here. The posture a vendor shows on day one becomes the baseline you monitor against.
  2. Risk Assessment: Conduct a structured evaluation of each vendor’s security posture, compliance status, and business continuity risk. This includes technical assessments of their external attack surface and review of third-party attestations like SOC 2 reports, HECVATs, and questionnaire responses.
  3. Continuous Monitoring: A vendor’s risk posture changes between assessments — new vulnerabilities emerge, certifications expire, configurations drift. Continuous monitoring tracks these changes in real time rather than waiting for an annual review cycle to surface them.
  4. Remediation: When risks are identified, they need an owner and a path to resolution. This stage involves collaborative workflows with vendors to close gaps, verify remediation, and document decisions for audit purposes.
  5. Offboarding: Vendor relationships end. When they do, access must be revoked, data handled per contractual obligations, and the relationship formally closed in your risk program. Poor offboarding is a consistently underestimated source of residual risk.

Why Regulators Are Paying Attention to Third-Party Risk

Third-party risk management has moved from industry best practice to explicit compliance obligation across most regulated sectors. The regulatory pressure is coming from multiple directions simultaneously.

DORA — the EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act, effective January 2025 — requires financial entities to maintain a complete register of third-party ICT providers and monitor vendor risk on an ongoing basis, not annually. NIS2 is also including third-party risk management evidence, not just contract language.

GLBA‘s updated Safeguards Rule requires financial institutions, including colleges and universities administering federal student aid, to formally oversee service provider security by contract and practice.

HIPAA holds covered entities liable for PHI breaches caused by business associates, and proposed updates to the HIPAA Security Rule would require annual written verification of BA security controls, a materially higher bar than a signed agreement.

NIST CSF 2.0’s new Govern function elevates supply chain risk management to a core organizational discipline, and SOC 2 Type II (the de facto vendor attestation standard in most industries) remains a point-in-time audit, not a continuous guarantee.

The common thread across all of these frameworks is the same: periodic reviews and signed agreements are no longer sufficient evidence of vendor risk management. Regulators want documented, ongoing oversight.

For organizations in financial services, healthcare, and higher education especially, that expectation is already enforceable, and tightening.

How FortifyData Does TPRM Differently

FortifyData is built around a premise that most TPRM tools don’t act on: the most important question about a vendor isn’t what their questionnaire says, it’s what their environment actually shows. Every capability in FortifyData’s TPRM platform is designed to answer that question continuously, automatically, and at a scale that doesn’t require adding headcount to sustain.

The volume and complexity of third-party risk evidence has outpaced human capacity. AI is no longer a future concept in TPRM, it is the only practical way to scale analysis, improve consistency, and maintain defensible risk decisions without adding headcount.

Organizations that adopt AI-driven auditing and automated workflows gain speed, clarity, and confidence in how they manage third-party risk.

AI Auditor: Automated Review of Vendor Reports & Artifacts

Security teams spend significant time reading vendor documentation that could, and should, be analyzed automatically.

FortifyData’s AI Auditor is purpose-built to review third-party reports at scale: SOC 2 reports, HECVATs, compliance documentation, and questionnaire responses are ingested and analyzed against your organization’s chosen frameworks and risk methodology.

Every conclusion the AI Auditor produces is supported by citations back to the original source material. That means your team gets findings they can act on, and findings they can defend, without manually reading every page of every report. Faster assessments, higher confidence, and dramatically reduced analyst time per vendor.

See the AI Auditor in Action – 3-minute demo.

FortifyData AI Auditor of SOC 2 and vendor reports dashboard image

Continuous External Assessment - Beyond Security Ratings

FortifyData continuously monitors each vendor’s external attack surface: open ports, TLS/SSL vulnerabilities, misconfigured services, and other externally observable risk signals. This runs automatically and persistently, not on an annual schedule.

For prospective vendors, this gives you an objective baseline before you make a commitment.

For existing vendors, it means you know when their posture changes rather than discovering it at the next review cycle. Risk cybersecurity rating scoring criteria can be weighted and customized by vendor or vendor group, so your highest-risk vendors get the scrutiny their risk level warrants.

Security ratings laptop image

Auto-Validated Questionnaires

FortifyData’s questionnaire management closes the gap between what vendors claim and what their environments actually show. When a vendor responds to a questionnaire, their answers are automatically cross-referenced against the live technical assessment data FortifyData has already collected on their environment.

Contradictions are flagged. Compliance gaps are surfaced. You get the answers you need in the time it takes to run an assessment — not the weeks it takes to chase down a manual questionnaire process.

Custom questionnaires can be created for specific vendors, and task management and collaboration capabilities keep the workflow organized across your team.

blank

Third-Party Risk Exchange

FortifyData’s Questionnaire Exchange accelerates vendor evaluations by allowing organizations to share validated cyber risk assessments across participants. Instead of running a full evaluation from scratch for every new vendor relationship, teams can access shared assessments that have already been validated against live technical data — dramatically reducing the time from vendor inquiry to risk decision.

Compliance Reporting and Gap Analysis

FortifyData measures vendor compliance against standard frameworks — ISO 27001, PCI DSS, NIST CSF, HIPAA, SOC 2, and others — and surfaces gaps automatically. Security teams can see exactly where vendor controls fall short relative to the frameworks they’re accountable to, without manually mapping questionnaire responses to control requirements.

With our automated compliance validation, you can discover gaps in controls, allowing you to spend less time reviewing evidence.

Compliance Findings

Related Control Findings for companies with assigned questionnaires

blank

Open Ports

Open, insecure communication ports found.

blank

Vulnerabilities

TLS/SSL Vulnerabilities Found.

Learn from Our TPRM Experts

Hear and learn from FortifyData’s own third-party risk management team in these videos.

blank
blank

Improve Your TPRM Program in 45 Days
Watch to get a 45-Day plan to turn around your TPRM program or to jump start a new TPRM program.

Make TPRM Work Disappear
Learn about the key criteria in looking for a TPRM Managed Services provider to handle your vendor risk program.

Trusted by Security and Risk Teams

Pima Community College
CISO – Lorenso Trevino

US Mortgage Lending Company
Director of Cybersecurity Services

Viedoc
CISO – Predrag Gaic

By automating AI vendor risk assessments, teams have slashed the time dedicated to vendor report reviews to under 2%, freeing up resources to prioritize proactive security tasks.

“The AI Auditor analysis would draw the same conclusions in a fraction of the time, while also highlighting concerns that we may have overlooked.”

Read more in this case study.

More accurate information lets the security team can drill down specifically to assets and vulnerabilities and provide actionable data to vendors that can be used for remediation.

“One of biggest reasons we chose FortifyData is the ability to do fresh scans for our third parties, and the scans are not based on any legacy data. That gives me a more accurate representation of what the security vulnerabilities are.”

Explore the full story for this mortgage lender.

The platform’s ability to assess vendors across the globe without relying on questionnaires was a significant advantage

“FortifyData was one of the few tools able to scan the posture of Chinese-based providers. By knowing the security posture of our vendors, especially in China, we can ensure acceptable risk levels.”

Learn more about how we are helping Viedoc.

See FortifyData in Action

Your vendor ecosystem is changing faster than your review cycle can track. FortifyData gives your team the continuous visibility and AI-powered analysis to keep pace, without adding headcount or complexity to your program.

Download Our AI TPRM Whitepaper
Request a Demo
TPRM dashboard

Managed TPRM Services

Your TPRM Team

All of the outcomes, none of the work.

Running a third-party risk program takes expertise, bandwidth, and consistency — three things most security teams are already stretched on.

FortifyData’s TPRM Managed Services puts an experienced team to work on your vendor risk program, from assessments and questionnaire management to continuous monitoring and reporting. Because we assess vendors through external attack surface data rather than waiting on questionnaire responses, most clients have a running program within days, not the weeks or months a traditional managed TPRM engagement typically requires.

Explore TPRM Managed Services
blank