Ivanti Blog: Posts by

Inventory to Intelligence: How AI and Automation Improve Endpoint Visibility

Fri, 03 Apr 2026 13:00:09 Z

Endpoint visibility has always been foundational to IT and security. You can’t secure, patch or support what you can’t see.

But as environments have become more distributed and complex, what visibility means has evolved. It’s no longer enough to know that a device exists — IT teams and organizations as a whole need to understand its health, its risk posture and its impact on both security and user experience.

This is where AI and endpoint automation start to make a practical difference. By moving endpoint visibility from static inventory to continuous intelligence, organizations can shift from reactive discovery to proactive, even autonomous operations.

Why traditional discovery practices fall short

Traditional discovery practices were built for a very different IT reality. Their approach is designed for relatively static environments, clearly defined perimeters and manual processes. That strategy doesn’t scale well in today’s hybrid, cloud-first world.

Manual discovery workflows often produce incomplete or outdated inventories. Ivanti’s 2026 Autonomous Endpoint Management Advantage Report reinforces this reality: Only 52% of organizations report using an endpoint management solution today, leaving many environments with limited centralized visibility and persistent blind spots across unmanaged or shadow IT.

In practice, this fragmentation shows up in very familiar ways. Teams often juggle multiple inventories, one from an on-prem client management tool, another from an MDM platform and yet another from identity or access systems, leaving gaps that widen as environments grow more complex.

Common challenges in manual device discovery

Manual discovery relies heavily on human input, which introduces inconsistency and error. As environments grow more distributed, these processes struggle to evolve with them, making it difficult to keep inventories accurate as devices are added, reassigned or accessed remotely. Reconciling changes across large estates becomes time-consuming and brittle, increasing the likelihood that devices fall out of view entirely.

Over time, these limitations compound. Discovery becomes episodic rather than continuous, and visibility lags behind reality. By the time inventories are reconciled, the environment has already changed.

Visibility gaps and security risks

These gaps aren’t theoretical. Ivanti’s research shows that many organizations still struggle with foundational endpoint visibility even after deploying multiple management tools. Endpoint data exists across scanners, MDM platforms and access systems, but it is rarely centralized, continuously updated, or trusted across teams. As a result, shadow IT, unmanaged devices and unknown access paths remain persistent sources of security and compliance risk.

Blind spots create real risk. Many organizations struggle to identify which devices are vulnerable or even actively accessing their environments.

When teams can’t reliably understand device exposure or access patterns, security decisions are made using incomplete or outdated data, increasing risk and delaying remediation. In fact, the above-mentioned Ivanti report highlights how common these blind spots are:

45% of organizations report challenges identifying shadow IT
41% struggle to identify vulnerabilities across devices
35% say data blind spots make it difficult to determine patch compliance.

Device discovery vs. device health monitoring

Discovery is only the first step. Knowing that a device exists doesn't tell you whether it's secure, compliant or even functioning properly. That’s where device health monitoring becomes critical.

Discovery tells you what’s present. Health monitoring adds the context that actually matters, from performance and configuration drift to overall security posture. Research from Ivanti’s 2025 Securing the Borderless Digital Landscape report underscores how significant these visibility gaps remain: Two out of five (38%) of IT professionals say they lack sufficient data about devices accessing the network, and 45% report insufficient visibility into shadow IT.

BYOD and edge devices, especially, are a concern. These can be online and still pose significant risk. It may be missing critical patches, running outdated software, drifting from configuration standards or suffering performance issues that impact users.

Presence data answers the question, “Is it there?” Health data answers, “Is it safe, compliant, and usable?” Without health insights, organizations are effectively managing endpoints in the dark.

Key indicators of endpoint health

To manage endpoints proactively, organizations need continuous visibility into key health indicators.

This includes:

Operating system and application versions
Patch and antivirus status
Configuration drift
Overall security posture

User experience signals such as crashes, latency and performance degradation also provide early warning signs that something isn’t right.

Modern platforms unify these signals into a single view, allowing IT and security teams to understand not just what devices exist, but how they're performing and where risk is emerging.

The risk of tracking only device presence

When organizations focus only on device presence, they expose themselves to both security and operational risks. Visibility without context leads to delayed detection, missed compliance requirements and reactive management.

Negative impacts on security and compliance

Tracking presence alone increases the likelihood that malware, misconfigurations or policy violations go undetected. Devices that are not enrolled in management or out of compliance may still access sensitive resources, creating gaps in enforcement. When access decisions aren’t tied to device state, enforcement becomes inconsistent by default.

Strong endpoint visibility, access and security ensure that only managed and compliant devices can reach sensitive systems and data.

Tying access to management and compliance status is critical. Conditional access, VPN and zero trust controls are only effective when visibility and enrollment are enforced consistently across endpoints.

Patch management is one of the areas where limited visibility creates the most operational strain. Our IT and security research shows that many IT teams struggle to track patch status across their full endpoint estate and to stay compliant as environments become more distributed. For example, of those we surveyed,

38% of IT and security professionals say they have difficulty tracking patch status and rollouts.
35% of teams struggle to stay compliant.

These challenges aren’t about patch availability alone. They stem from gaps in visibility into device state, ownership and real-world exposure, making it difficult to prioritize and verify remediation.

Operational inefficiencies

From an operational perspective, limited visibility leads to inefficiency. IT teams spend time troubleshooting issues that automation could resolve, chasing devices that should have been discovered automatically, and reacting to incidents rather than preventing them.

Without health data, teams are forced into a firefighting mode, responding to problems after they impact users instead of addressing them proactively.

This is exactly where AI and automation can begin to change the equation.

How AI and endpoint automation improve endpoint visibility

AI and automation turn endpoint visibility from a one-time discovery exercise into a continuous, self-sustaining capability. They enable teams to unify data, detect anomalies and maintain accurate inventories without manual effort.

Unified telemetry across multiple sources

Modern endpoint management platforms with AI and automation capabilities consolidate telemetry from discovery, UEM, MDM, patching, vulnerability and security tools into a unified, continuously updated view. This unified telemetry eliminates the need to reconcile siloed inventories and provides a shared, reliable view for both IT and security.

By normalizing data across desktop, mobile, server and IoT devices, organizations gain holistic visibility that supports faster, more confident decision-making.

Our autonomous endpoint management (AEM) research also shows that organizations make the most progress when endpoint visibility is treated as a shared objective. Teams that track metrics such as time to discovery, percentage of fully managed endpoints and exposure duration through shared dashboards are better able to align IT and security around the same data. This shared visibility turns endpoint management from siloed reporting into a coordinated, data-driven process.

AI-Powered automation and autonomous bots

Automation plays a critical role in keeping visibility current. AI-powered bots can automatically rediscover devices, reconcile duplicates, update ownership and location and detect anomalies across the environment.

When agents stop reporting or profiles break, automated workflows can repair or reinstall them without human intervention. This ensures that visibility doesn’t degrade over time and reduces the operational burden on IT teams.

Self-healing workflows for IT productivity

Self-healing workflows extend automation to the endpoint itself. Common issues such as failed updates, stopped services or configuration drift can be detected and resolved automatically, often before users notice a problem.

Endpoint automation enables these self-healing workflows to operate continuously in the background, resolving common issues without waiting for human intervention.

By resolving these issues without tickets, organizations reduce downtime, improve user experience and free IT staff to focus on higher-value initiatives. In fact, over two-thirds of IT teams today believe that AI and automation in ITSM will allow them to deliver better service experiences and give them more time to support business objectives.

Broader impact on security, productivity and user experience

When AI and automation are integrated into endpoint visibility, the benefits extend beyond IT operations. Security posture improves and users experience fewer disruptions — and productivity increases.

By combining endpoint visibility and control, organizations can reduce risk while still supporting productivity and flexible operating models.

Closing visibility gaps

AI-driven insights eliminate blind spots by continuously monitoring endpoint activity and health. Instead of relying on periodic scans or manual checks, organizations maintain real-time awareness of their endpoint environment.

This continuous visibility transforms endpoint management from a static inventory project into a living, breathing capability that adapts as the environment changes.

Improving IT operations and end-user satisfaction

Automation reduces ticket volume and accelerates resolution times, while predictive analytics help prevent downtime before it impacts users. Ring deployments, maintenance windows and self-service catalogs allow changes to be delivered with minimal disruption.

When users experience faster support and fewer interruptions, resistance to endpoint management drops and adoption improves. Over time, this creates a healthier feedback loop where visibility, automation and user experience reinforce each other instead of competing.

This is where autonomous endpoint management takes organizations next. Visibility becomes continuous instead of episodic. Automation keeps inventories accurate, health signals current and risk visible in real time.

With shared data and clear ownership, IT and security teams stop reacting to issues after the fact and start managing endpoints proactively. That shift from inventory to intelligence is what enables autonomous endpoint management, and it’s quickly becoming the standard for modern IT operations.

How AI-Driven Automation Solves Patch Management Silos

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 15:37:11 Z

"We see 10,000 critical vulnerabilities!"

"We patched everything last week!"

This conversation happens in enterprise IT departments every single day. Security teams present dashboards filled with red alerts. IT teams show deployment reports at 98% success. Both teams are looking at real data. Both are absolutely correct. And both are totally blind to what's actually happening across the endpoint environment.

This isn't a people problem — your teams aren't incompetent. It's not a process problem — your workflows aren't broken. It's a technology problem: you're asking two teams to manage the same risk using systems that show them different realities.

Security teams are given one version of reality through vulnerability scanners and threat intelligence. Meanwhile, IT teams see things differently when looking at their device management and patch deployment reports.

The tricky part is that both views can be correct in isolation and still be misleading in practice. That's how you end up in the familiar stalemate: security reports thousands of critical vulnerabilities; IT reports that patches are successfully deployed. The disconnect lives in the gap between those systems.

Why IT and security are misaligned on patching

Most organizations approach patching misalignment between IT and security by improving communication between IT and security. They schedule more meetings. They create escalation paths. They implement SLAs. And six months later, they're having the exact same argument with better PowerPoint slides.

Here's what nobody wants to admit: you can't collaborate your way out of a data fragmentation problem. When IT and security are working from fundamentally different inventories of what exists, what's vulnerable and what's been fixed, adding more coordination overhead just slows down an already broken process.

This is why the same conversation plays out again and again inside many organizations. Both teams are confident in their data, and both are “right” within the narrow context of the tools they rely on.

And that’s the problem. While both views are “right,” neither reflects the full lifecycle of risk. Vulnerability data doesn’t always reflect whether affected devices are managed or reachable. Patch reports don’t always account for unmanaged, misclassified or newly discovered endpoints that still have access to corporate resources. What’s missing is a reliable answer to the only question that actually matters: which endpoints are exposed right now?

Technology silos create conflicting realities

Most enterprises manage endpoints through a hodgepodge of systems that have evolved independently over time, each capturing only a fragment of reality.

One system may surface critical exposure without knowing whether the device is being managed. Another may confirm successful remediation without accounting for newly discovered or misclassified endpoints that still have access. The result? No reliable way to trace risk from detection through deployment to actual exposure.

Consider this: the average organization manages only 60% of their edge devices, according to Ivanti's Securing the Borderless Digital Landscape Report. That means 40% of potential entry points exist outside IT's view and outside their patch workflows. Security sees them. IT doesn't. That's your vulnerability gap. Without that continuity, teams are forced to reconcile partial views manually. Data gets debated instead of acted on.

Different data views lead to friction

Imagine it’s Monday morning: Security discovers a critical zero-day in a widely used VPN client. They send an urgent alert to IT: "30,000 vulnerable endpoints detected — patch immediately."

IT checks their deployment console: "VPN client already updated across 28,000 devices last Thursday."

Both statements are true. Security is scanning the entire network — including contractor laptops, BYOD devices and systems that briefly connected to the VPN but aren't under IT management. IT patched everything in their device inventory.

Meanwhile, 2,000 genuinely vulnerable endpoints remain exposed because they exist in Security's view but not IT's. The patch that should have taken 24 hours now requires three days of manual reconciliation.

When IT and security operate from different data sources, misaligned vulnerability management priorities are inevitable. Security teams focus on vulnerability counts, severity scores and exploit intelligence. IT teams prioritize deployment success, system stability and user impact. Both perspectives are necessary, but without a shared frame of reference, they pull in different directions.

What follows isn’t just tension; it’s decision paralysis. Remediation slows while teams reconcile inventories, validate findings and argue about scope. Vulnerabilities remain open longer than they should, not because patches aren’t available, but because there’s no single view that connects detection, deployment and exposure.

The risk of misaligned patching priorities

Misalignment slows collaboration, but more so, it creates measurable risk that extends well beyond internal friction.

Ivanti’s Autonomous Endpoint Management research reflects this challenge in practice:

38% of IT professionals report difficulty tracking patch status.
35% struggle to meet remediation timelines due to incomplete endpoint visibility.

When vulnerabilities remain open longer than necessary, the window of exposure grows. Attackers don’t wait. The CISA KEV catalog reveals the difficult truth: 30% of vulnerabilities being actively exploited right now were originally disclosed more than five years ago.

That's not a patching problem; it’s a visibility problem. Organizations aren't ignoring available patches; they're missing the endpoints that still need them.

Prolonged exposure windows and breach risk

Fragmentation stretches exposure windows in subtle ways. Devices that were never enrolled in management platforms, such as shadow BYOD, unsecured contractor devices or remote endpoints outside the traditional perimeter, often go unnoticed.

Research from Ivanti shows that only one in three employers have implemented zero trust network access for remote workers, leaving significant gaps in visibility across distributed environments. Newly discovered endpoints appear after patch reports are generated. Systems drift out of compliance between scan cycles. Each delay compounds the risk, extending the time attackers have to weaponize known weaknesses.

Common post-patch issues and IT ticket overload

Even when patches are deployed on schedule, manual patching often creates downstream issues. Failed updates, broken agents, performance problems and unexpected reboots trigger support tickets and emergency fixes. What starts as a security task quickly becomes an operational drain.

IT teams spend time resolving predictable failures instead of improving endpoint posture. Security teams see delays as unresolved risk. Users associate patching with disruption. That friction persists across teams, even when their goals are aligned.

Transforming patch management with autonomous endpoint management

AI and automation address the core disconnects in patch management by unifying visibility and reducing manual coordination. When endpoint discovery, vulnerability data, device health and patch status are correlated into a unified view, IT and security teams can work from the same facts instead of reconciling partial data across tools.

Autonomous endpoint management (AEM) brings clarity to the confusion by using AI intelligence and automation to give IT and security a single, continuously updated view of endpoints, their health and their exposure.

How AI improves patching decisions

AI improves patching decisions by prioritizing vulnerabilities based on real-world risk rather than severity scores alone. By factoring in exploit activity, asset criticality and exposure context, teams can align on what to patch first and focus effort where it will reduce risk fastest.

With autonomous endpoint management, that same Monday morning scenario plays out differently:

The vulnerability is detected, and AI immediately cross-references it against a unified endpoint inventory. It identifies 1,560 devices running the vulnerable version, including 217 devices that were previously unmanaged.

Automated patch workflows simultaneously: enroll the unmanaged devices, prioritize patching based on exposure risk and asset criticality. They then schedule deployment during low-usage windows, and begin ring-based rollout.

By the time the security team sends the alert, IT already has a real-time dashboard showing remediation in progress — with the same device count, the same exposure data and the same prioritization logic. No reconciliation necessary.

How automation accelerates remediation

Automation then turns those decisions into action. Patch workflows can be orchestrated end to end: identifying affected devices, deploying updates and validating remediation without constant manual intervention.

AI-powered intelligent patch scheduling minimizes user impact by aligning deployments with device usage patterns, maintenance windows and operational constraints. Ring-based rollouts allow patches to be validated on smaller groups before wider deployment, reducing disruption while accelerating remediation. The result is faster patching, less downtime and a more predictable process for both teams.

Self-healing workflows detect and resolve common issues automatically, such as restarting services, reinstalling agents or correcting misconfigurations. These workflows prevent avoidable incidents before they turn into support tickets.

From data debates to unified intelligence and shared visibility

AI-driven platforms unify endpoint visibility by correlating discovery data, vulnerability context, device health and patch status into a single endpoint record, with enrollment and access controls ensuring that devices are continuously discovered and managed throughout their lifecycle. IT and security teams see the same devices, the same exposure and the same remediation status in real time.

This unified intelligence eliminates debates over whose data is correct and replaces them with agreement on which risks to address first. By integrating remediation into broader endpoint workflows, teams reduce manual effort and maintain consistent patch outcomes at scale. By integrating remediation into broader endpoint workflows, teams reduce manual effort and maintain consistent patch outcomes at scale.

Shared patch ownership: powering IT and security collaboration

AI and automation only improve patch management when they’re paired with shared ownership. When IT and security teams operate from the same endpoint data and remediation workflows, accountability shifts from defending individual reports to jointly reducing exposure.

A data-driven patch process starts with mutual goals. Instead of tracking success in isolated tools, organizations align IT and security around common metrics that reflect real-world risk and operational impact. This shared measurement creates clarity on priorities and removes ambiguity around ownership.

Effective collaboration depends on metrics both teams trust and act on together. Common KPIs include:

Mean Time to Remediate (MTTR): How quickly critical vulnerabilities are resolved
Patch compliance rates: Across both managed and previously unmanaged endpoints
Exposure duration: How long high-risk vulnerabilities remain open
Endpoint visibility: Percentage of devices fully discovered and managed

These metrics shift conversations from patch volume to measured risk outcomes and help teams focus on outcomes instead of activity.

Joint ownership requires workflows that span the entire patch lifecycle. AI-driven platforms support this by automating routine tasks while surfacing exceptions that require human judgment.

IT and security leaders define guardrails for automation, including approval thresholds, testing requirements and rollout constraints. Within those boundaries, automation executes remediation consistently and at scale, without constant manual coordination. Over time, trust in the process grows, coordination overhead decreases, and patching becomes a cooperative operational responsibility rather than a point of friction.

Visit our solutions page to discover how Ivanti's autonomous endpoint management solutions give IT and security teams the unified visibility they need to eliminate patching silos and close vulnerabilities faster.

Who Owns Endpoint Management? Defining Security and IT Governance

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:30:01 Z

Endpoint management is one of the most critical — and most contested — areas of enterprise governance. Every organization depends on endpoints, yet many still struggle to answer a fundamental question: who actually owns these devices?

In many environments, IT and security teams are both confident they’re doing the right thing, yet still talk past each other. Security looks at a scanner and sees 10,000 critical vulnerabilities; IT looks at a patch report and sees everything deployed. They're both right, but they're speaking different languages.

The result is stalled risk remediation efforts, policy friction and growing frustration. Teams debate whose data is accurate instead of closing gaps. When endpoint management is governed jointly, with shared visibility and accountability, teams can shift their focus from reconciling data to improving execution.

As endpoint environments scale, governance also depends on automation. AI-powered capabilities can help normalize data across siloed tools, surface unmanaged devices, and highlight asset visibility gaps, making shared ownership possible without relying on manual reconciliation.

Why endpoint management ownership matters

Endpoints are where users work, where data is accessed and where many security incidents begin. When ownership of endpoint management is unclear, fissures start to appear.

Ivanti’s Autonomous Endpoint Management Advantage report shows that these visibility gaps are widespread and consequential. Just over half of organizations report using endpoint management solutions that provide centralized visibility, meaning many teams still struggle to see their full device landscape. These blind spots extend beyond unmanaged IT devices.

45% of security and IT professionals cite shadow IT as a key data gap.
41% report difficulty identifying vulnerabilities.
38% can’t reliably tell which devices are even accessing their network.

Most organizations believe they know what’s on their network, until they turn on proper discovery. The reality is that device lists are usually siloed: one from your MDM, another from on-prem tools and something else from the identity provider.

As a result, basic questions become hard to answer: which devices are fully managed, which are compliant and which can access sensitive resources without controls.

AI-powered automation can help continuously correlate endpoint data across management, identity and endpoint security solutions, reducing blind spots that manual processes routinely miss.

But visibility is only valuable when it’s shared and governed. You can’t secure, patch or support what you can’t see. Without a shared, trusted view and clear governance of endpoints, well-intentioned efforts still lead to friction, delays and increased risk. That’s why endpoint management is ultimately a governance problem, not just a technical one.

Security isn’t the only issue with these blind spots. Patching is slowed, support gets complicated and policy enforcement is undermined. When IT and security teams rely on different datasets, disagreements over risk and remediation are inevitable.

Clear ownership changes that dynamic. When endpoint management is governed jointly, with shared visibility and accountability, organizations are better positioned to move from debating data to closing gaps. Endpoint management becomes a foundation for consistent policy enforcement, faster remediation and better collaboration across teams.

Common points of friction between IT and security teams

Most friction between IT and security doesn’t come from bad intent. It comes from misalignment.

Our autonomous endpoint management research also suggests this misalignment isn’t abstract; it’s measurable and costly. We found that:

56% of IT professionals say wasteful IT spend is a problem.
And 39% point to inefficient tech support as an area of waste.

Nearly nine in ten respondents also report that siloed data negatively impacts IT operations, driving inefficient use of resources, reduced collaboration and elevated risk of non-compliance.

In practice, this misalignment tends to surface in a few consistent and recurring friction points:

Fragmented tooling

Fragmented tooling is a major barrier. Many organizations juggle an older on-prem client tool, a separate MDM for mobile and a different solution for patches. The result is tech sprawl that makes the problem worse.

As this disconnect plays out in practice, security and IT teams often rely on different tools and datasets to assess the same endpoints, leading to very different conclusions about risk and remediation status.

AI-driven analysis can add context across these datasets, helping IT and security teams interpret exposure through a shared lens rather than competing reports.

User impact

User impact is another source of tension. Endpoint controls are often seen as restrictive, raising concerns about performance, downtime or privacy, especially on bring-your own (BYOD) devices. IT teams are left balancing enforcement with user experience, while security pushes for stricter controls.

Resource constraints

Resource constraints make this harder. Teams are wary of introducing new platforms or policies that appear complex or disruptive, especially when they’re already stretched thin.

Without clear governance, these issues lead to inconsistent enforcement, stalled remediation and shadow policy decisions. Endpoint management stays reactive. But the good news is that this is solvable.

Balancing security requirements and business flexibility

One of the hardest challenges in endpoint management is balancing security with business flexibility. Security teams want consistent controls to reduce risk. Business leaders want minimal disruption and the freedom to work without friction. IT teams are often caught in the middle.

When this balance isn’t clearly defined, endpoint policies become a source of conflict. Strict controls applied universally can slow productivity, frustrate users and encourage workarounds. Too much flexibility, on the other hand, increases exposure and makes enforcement inconsistent.

The real issue is that organizations fail to agree upfront on what’s mandatory and where flexibility is acceptable. Without that clarity, organizations negotiate policy decisions ad hoc and react to incidents instead of managing risk proactively.

Effective endpoint governance reframes the conversation. By defining baseline requirements upfront and aligning them to risk, organizations can protect critical assets while still supporting different user needs and operating models. This shift allows security and IT to move from constant trade-offs to structured decision-making. That's when the relationship fundamentally changes from friction to alignment.

Who should own endpoint governance?

Endpoint governance can't sit with a single team. It requires shared ownership across IT, security and the business.

In successful organizations, endpoint governance is shaped by a group that includes IT operations, security and key business stakeholders. This group defines decision rights, agrees on priorities and establishes a common policy framework that everyone operates within.

Security brings risk context and threat awareness. IT brings operational insight and user impact considerations. Business leaders provide perspective on workflows, productivity and acceptable levels of disruption. When these perspectives are aligned early, endpoint policies are easier to enforce and less likely to be bypassed.

Governance clarifies accountability. It answers questions like who decides what's mandatory, how exceptions are handled and how conflicts are resolved. With that structure in place, endpoint management becomes a coordinated program rather than a series of isolated decisions.

Defining risk remediation priorities and timelines

Effective endpoint governance depends on clear agreement around risk remediation priorities and timelines. Without that agreement, IT and security teams often talk past each other, prioritizing volume instead of focusing on what matters most.

The problem with patching is prioritization, and Ivanti’s autonomous endpoint management research confirms this isn't just a theoretical problem but a measurable operational challenge:

39% of IT teams struggle to prioritize risk remediation and patch deployment.
38% have difficulty tracking patch status and rollouts.
And 35% struggle to stay compliant with patching.

These are all outcomes that stem largely from visibility gaps and inconsistent tooling, making it harder to focus remediation efforts.

Traditional approaches rely on CVSS scores and long spreadsheets that don't reflect real-world risk at all. Context matters: whether a device is Internet-facing, who uses it, what data it touches and how likely exploitation is, with AI-powered analysis helping teams assess that context continuously at scale.

Governance helps shift remediation from a volume-driven exercise to a risk-based one. By defining patching timelines, escalation paths and ownership upfront, organizations can align IT and security around shared priorities. Instead of debating which issues to address first, teams can focus on execution.

Clear timelines reduce friction by making remediation predictable instead of reactive. This consistency improves accountability, shortens exposure windows and builds trust between teams.

Non-negotiables vs. flexibility zones

One of the most important outcomes of endpoint governance is clarity around what's required and where flexibility is allowed.

Non-negotiables are the baseline. This includes disk encryption, specific patch management timelines and mandatory enrollment before a device can touch sensitive data. Defining these controls upfront removes ambiguity and ensures a consistent security posture.

Flexibility zones acknowledge that not all endpoints are the same. Different teams, roles and operating models may require tailored policies, especially in environments with BYOD, contractors or frontline workers. Governance defines where exceptions are permitted, how they are approved and how risk is managed when flexibility is granted.

Without this distinction, organizations either over-restrict users or allow uncontrolled exceptions. With it, endpoint management becomes both enforceable and adaptable.

Security teams know which controls cannot be compromised, while IT and the business retain the flexibility needed to support productivity. This balance makes endpoint governance enforceable and practical.

Building trust through shared dashboards and transparency

Even the best endpoint governance framework breaks down without shared visibility. When IT and security teams operate from different dashboards and reports, trust erodes and shadow decisions take root.

These disconnects are often rooted in fragmented data pipelines, where endpoint information is incomplete, outdated or inconsistently updated across tools and systems. Shared dashboards only change that dynamic when they are built on continuously updated, reconciled data. Autonomous endpoint management, powered by AI, helps make this possible by automatically correlating endpoint signals across discovery, compliance, vulnerability and remediation data sources.

When both teams rely on the same data — covering device inventory, compliance status, vulnerability exposure and remediation progress — conversations become grounded in facts rather than assumptions. Disagreements shift from “Whose data is right?” to “What issue should we tackle next?”

Data transparency changes the culture from finger-pointing to IT and security collaboration. Instead of security saying they’ve found more unmanaged laptops, the conversation becomes: “We have a visibility gap – how do we close it?”

Joint IT and security metrics such as time to discovery, percentage of fully managed endpoints and exposure duration create a common language for decision-making. AI-driven automation helps keep those metrics accurate and current. Shared dashboards reinforce accountability.

When progress and gaps are visible to all stakeholders, endpoint governance stops being an abstract policy discussion and becomes a measurable, collaborative effort. This visibility is what turns governance from intent into execution.

Measuring the effectiveness of endpoint governance

Endpoint governance only works if organizations can measure whether it’s actually reducing risk and improving operations. Without clear KPIs and accessible data, governance quickly becomes a policy exercise rather than a practical discipline.

In practice, effective measurement spans visibility, risk and operational performance.

Visibility and coverage metrics

Effective measurement starts with visibility. These metrics show whether endpoints are governed in practice, not just on paper.

Percentage of endpoints that are fully managed
Time to discover new or previously unknown devices
Number and persistence of unmanaged or unknown endpoints

AI-powered automation supports continuous measurement here by tracking trends in coverage and policy drift over time rather than relying on point-in-time reports.

Risk and exposure metrics

Risk-based metrics help teams move beyond volume and focus remediation on what matters most.

Exposure time for critical vulnerabilities
Devices with the highest risk based on context and access
Alignment of remediation activity to real-world exploitability

These metrics help IT and security teams prioritize actions that have clear business impact, rather than chasing patch counts or compliance percentages alone.

Operational performance metrics

Operational metrics indicate whether endpoint governance is improving day-to-day execution and user experience.

Reductions in endpoint-related security incidents
Faster onboarding and offboarding of users and devices
Fewer support tickets tied to endpoint configuration or patching issues

Over time, improvements in these indicators show whether automation, self-healing and policy enforcement are delivering measurable value.

Endpoint governance KPIs must be reviewed jointly, with IT and security looking at the same data and course-correcting as needed. This reinforces accountability and enables continuous improvement. As environments evolve, policies, priorities and controls should evolve with them. Endpoint governance isn’t static — it’s an ongoing process that adapts as risk, technology and business needs change.

Defining ownership to scale endpoint management

Endpoint management doesn’t fail for lack of technology. It fails when ownership is unclear and governance is fragmented.

As endpoints continue to diversify and work becomes more distributed, the question of who owns endpoint management can no longer be left ambiguous. Security, IT and the business all have a stake, and effective governance brings those perspectives together under a shared framework.

When organizations establish clear ownership, define non-negotiables and operate from a shared view of endpoints, AI-powered automation helps endpoint management shift from reactive firefighting to proactive risk reduction. Shared dashboards, agreed-upon remediation timelines and continuous measurement replace ad hoc decisions and shadow policies.

Success comes from treating endpoint management as a unifying, automation-first program. In practice, the pattern is clear: when visibility, shared ownership and governance come together, endpoints shift from a friction point to a foundation for resilience and collaboration.

Combining MDM and MTD for Strategic Security

Thu, 25 Jul 2024 07:00:00 Z

The mobile threat landscape is constantly evolving, with advanced threats like CryptoChameleon emerging all the time. To effectively combat these challenges, organizations need a comprehensive solution – and that’s where combining Mobile Threat Defense (MTD) and Mobile Device Management (MDM) comes in.

While MTD can identify potential threats on mobile devices, it often lacks the capability to take proactive measures to address them once they’ve been identified. Organizations still need a way to manage and secure their devices throughout their lifecycle, from initial enrollment to decommissioning.

Integrating MDM with MTD is key to achieving strategic cybersecurity benefits. This approach goes beyond merely boosting mobile security; it represents a deliberate move toward creating a mobile ecosystem that is not only more secure but also more efficient and compliant.

By combining MTD and MDM, you gain a unified view of both security threats and device management statuses across your entire mobile fleet. This integration maximizes production efficiency and enhances overall visibility and control.

Imagine a single dashboard that eliminates the need for switching between separate MTD and MDM consoles. This consolidated management streamlines IT operations by offloading the burden of managing multiple products and consoles. In essence, you get a single pane of glass for both mobile security and device management.

This ensures that your organization can face the challenges of today's mobile threat landscape, all while maintaining a focus on user experience and operational efficiency.

The more mobile we are, the greater the risks

Mobile devices are essential business tools in today’s Everywhere Workplace. By 2025, it’s expected there will be over 18 billion mobile devices worldwide.

CryptoChameleon has spurred worldwide concern because of its innovative approach to compromising users. This “phishing kit” lets attackers build copies of SSO pages through which they can trick users into sharing usernames, passwords and more.

Every organization must realize the importance of shielding its endpoints and data from the threats that target mobile devices. According to Ivanti’s 2024 State of Cybersecurity Report:

81% of office workers admitted they are using some type of personal device for work; half of those are logging in to networks and work software on their personal devices.
40% said their employers don’t know about their activities.
23% of IT and security professionals said it is high-risk behavior for employees to use personal devices while working.
63% said their IT asset management solution tracks the practice of bringing your own device.

Better together: The benefits of MTD with MDM

In this landscape, traditional security methods aren't up to the task of countering dynamic new threats. What’s needed is a more integrated and comprehensive defense strategy.

That's where the synergy between MDM security and MTD security is vital. By integrating MDM and MTD, organizations can create a resilient and proactive security posture that does more than manage and secure mobile devices; it also detects and responds to emerging threats in real time.

Enhanced visibility and control

By unifying MTD and MDM, security teams gain a single pane of glass for managing their entire mobile fleet. They can view both device security threats and management statuses within the same dashboard.

Imagine having real-time access to information about potential malware infections alongside details like device compliance with security protocols. This comprehensive view allows for a quicker and more informed risk response.

Furthermore, this integration streamlines IT operations. Security teams no longer need to juggle separate platforms for monitoring devices and managing threats. This empowers them to quickly analyze and act on the information they see. They can identify and address security issues, enforce policies, and manage devices with greater efficiency, which also allows them to dedicate more time to strategic security initiatives.

Proactive threat detection and response

The power of integrating MDM and MTD goes beyond providing a unified view of your mobile environment. They elevate your mobile security posture from passive defense to proactive threat hunting.

MTD acts as a lookout with omniscient vision, always scanning your mobile fleet for even the slightest sign of trouble. It can detect suspicious app behavior, network anomalies and potential malware infections in real time. When they spot a potential threat, they immediately alert the system.

This is where MDM steps in as the swift and decisive response force. MDM's automated response capabilities can be preconfigured to take immediate action based on the threat identified by MTD. For example, MDM can automatically quarantine infected devices, block malicious websites or remotely wipe compromised data – effectively neutralizing the threat before it can cause damage. This eliminates the need for manual intervention while reducing the window of opportunity for cyber criminals.

Comprehensive security policies

Enforcing comprehensive corporate security policies across a mobile fleet can be a complex challenge. MDM's robust policy enforcement tools, combined with MTD's threat detection, can make this far easier.

This includes ensuring conditional access based on device compliance, ensuring that only squeaky-clean and secure policy-adhering devices can access corporate resources, enhancing overall security posture.

Other policies they can automatically enforce include: requiring strong passwords; device encryption; restriction of unauthorized applications from unknown sources; allowing approved applications for work purposes; and remote application and data wiping for lost or compromised devices.

Streamlined compliance and reporting

Cyber threats are complex enough, but organizations must also deal with a labyrinth of regulation. MDM and MTD can work hand in hand to streamline compliance, as their robust reporting functionalities generate detailed insights into both device management and security.

These reports can detail device configurations, access controls and security threats so organizations can easily demonstrate adherence to industry regulations and data privacy laws. These reports are a lifesaver during audits and compliance checks.

Beyond this, insights from MTD can reveal patterns of risky behavior on mobile devices, informing data-driven security decisions. By knowing where weaknesses lie, you can prioritize resources and implement targeted security measures to plug gaps before they turn into compliance issues.

User-centric security

Finding the right balance between robust protection and a seamless user experience is crucial. Overly stringent security measures can frustrate users and hinder productivity, while lax controls leave devices vulnerable.

MDM and MTD integration let an organization prioritize user experience without undermining protection. MDM allows for the creation of security policies that are transparent and less disruptive, while MTD's focus on real-time threat detection powers targeted interventions, minimizing disruption.

This goes beyond mitigation into empowering user education. MDM can be configured to send alerts to users highlighting potential security risks associated with specific apps or websites, and MTD can trigger notifications explaining the dangers of any suspicious activities detected on the device. These instructional nudges encourage a culture of security awareness among users – a win-win situation where you’re enhancing both security posture and user satisfaction.

Other benefits

Ironclad adoption: A best-in-class MDM will automatically push the MTD app to every device, running seamlessly in the background without requiring any user involvement.
Data-loss prevention: Sensitive data is secured against loss or unauthorized access even if a device is compromised.
Scalability: Mobile security can accommodate growth or changing threat landscapes.
Cost efficiency: Significant cost savings come from operational efficiencies, fewer standalone tools and incident prevention.

Integration considerations

CISOs and other security professionals want to ensure 100% of mobile devices on their network are managed and 100% secured. Integrating MDM and MTD is an important step toward achieving that.

This integration gives cybersecurity teams a centralized command center from which they can manage devices, enforce security policies and identify threats all in one place.

To make this integration a success, take these basic considerations into account as you make that move:

Seamless integration: When integrating MDM and MTD, ensure that the solutions communicate seamlessly, sharing data and triggers without manual intervention so they can deliver real-time threat response and policy enforcement.
Vendor collaboration: Choose MDM and MTD solutions that offer native integration capabilities or are known to work well together. You may want to opt for solutions from vendors who provide both MDM and MTD to ensure compatibility.

iOS 16 and Ivanti UEM: What to Know About the Latest Apple Release

Mon, 12 Sep 2022 20:03:12 Z

Apple’s iOS 16 brings a number of device management enhancements. Highlights include:

Identity and security: Managed Apple ID, User Enrollment
Device management: Cellular updates, Shared iPad management updates
Apple apps: Apple Configurator for iPhone, Classroom, Schoolwork
MDM Framework Update: Declarative Management

Ivanti’s UEM solutions are day-zero compatible for iOS 16, so customers won’t have to wait to take advantage of new enhancements. Let’s look at the key iOS 16 features that Ivanti will support from day zero.

Remote authentication on Shared iPad

Earlier versions of iPadOS require a Shared iPad to occasionally connect to the internet when a user tries to sign in. In iPadOS 16, Shared iPad defaults to using the local passcode for existing users on the device, requiring no network connection.

MDM administrators can also choose to always enforce remote authentication or to define a grace period before remote authentication is required, providing the flexibility to determine when remote passcode changes take effect on existing cached sign-ins.

How Ivanti users can access this feature: To change the remote authentication settings from the default local passcode, go to the DEP profile under Shared iPad settings.

Default domains setting on Shared iPad

The latest iOS also allows admins to include default domains, making signing into a Shared iPad even easier – particularly for those with a lengthy Managed Apple ID. After entering the username portion of a Managed Apple ID, users can select their account’s domain from a list in the QuickType keyboard.

How Ivanti users can access this feature: Under the Shared iPad setting, admins will find a new section where they can input a list of domains for the user to select from when logging in.

Other features with day-zero support

A new field to populate enablexlat464 in Cellular Payload.
The ability to add the new Apple Business Manager skip key to Terms of Address.

What else is coming?

Beyond the features above, we are diligently working to make sure our customers can enjoy the full set of iOS 16 features. New features coming soon include:

Managed device attestation.
Declarative management.
OAuth 2.0 support for account-based enrollments.

Device compatibility: iPhone SE (2022), SE (2020), iPhone 13 Pro Max, 13 Pro, 13, 13 mini, iPhone 12 Pro Max, 12 Pro, 12, 12 mini, iPhone 11 Pro Max, 11 Pro, 11, iPhone XS Max, XS, XR, X, iPhone 8 Plus, 8

Support discontinued: iPhone SE, iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus, iPod touch

Resources:

Statements in the blog concerning future product availability and plans are forward looking statements, and they are subject to change. They do not represent a commitment, promise or legal obligation to deliver any material, code or functionality, and should not be relied upon in making purchasing decisions.

Ivanti Delivers Day-Zero Compatibility and Key Feature Support for iOS and iPadOS 15

Mon, 20 Sep 2021 19:16:01 Z

Here at Ivanti, we are excited about iOS 15 and iPadOS 15. I’m pleased to share that we offer day-zero compatibility and key feature support across the Ivanti product portfolio for the new features built into Apple’s updated OSs.

iOS 15 and iPadOS 15 bring plenty of new things to see and experience with a combination of security, user experience, and performance. Some of the coolest new features and improvements include Managed Pasteboard, New Code signature format for security, Account-Driven User Enrollment, Required Apps and Books improvements, Declarative Management, and Software Update options and Shared iPad Enhancements.

Ivanti customers can take advantage of the new features in iOS 15 and iPadOS 15 including:

Managed Pasteboard: This is a new restriction which controls if the paste function is affected with managed open in rules. If this restriction is imposed, then the user will see a notification explaining that the paste feature is not allowed while trying to paste content. Your organization’s name can also be displayed on the notification, which can be customized in organization info settings with Ivanti Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) formerly MobileIron Cloud.
This is another new restriction that will allow admins to restrict the device from connecting to Siri servers for the purposes of translation. This feature is also available with Ivanti UEM.
New Code Signature Format: With iOS 15 Apple has again strengthened the security of the platform. Among the improvements, iOS 15 requires an updated code signature format. The good news is that these improvements do not require any changes from developers distributing their apps through the App Store or TestFlight because App Store Connect will re-sign the app. Ivanti customers distributing their apps though the Apple Developer Enterprise Program or using incapptic Connect don’t need to worry either. Starting with version 1.38.0 their apps can be re-signed automatically meeting iOS 15 requirements. Developers using ad hoc, or enterprise distribution might need to re-sign their apps manually and should check if their apps need to be re-signed using the codesign utility as outlined here.

Apart from the above features Ivanti is also diligently working on other cool features such as Account-Driven User Enrollment, Declarative Management, Apps and Book Improvements so our customers can enjoy the full set of iOS 15 and iPadOS 15 features. At Ivanti, we are committed to providing excellent customer service and support. We look forward to helping our customers leverage the full potential of the updates in iOS 15 and iPadOS 15.

To learn more and to check device compatibility:

https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-16/

https://www.apple.com/ipados/ipados-16/

Apple WWDC 2021

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 18:15:58 Z

Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference is a week of amazing sessions that define the coming year, announce new features, and preview technologies that will be at the core of managing Apple’s platforms inside your organization. Apple announced its latest versions of operating systems - iOS 15, iPadOS 15, watchOS 8, tvOS 15 and macOS Monterey, all of which have exciting new features shared across platforms that will make the Apple ecosystem even better. Apple hosted this conference virtually for the second year in a row due to the global pandemic.

Key announcements for iOS 15 consist of consumer and enterprise features such as major updates to FaceTime, new Focus features to reduce distraction, enhanced on-device intelligence to discover information, and more ways to explore the world using Maps, Weather, and Wallet.

One of the key enterprise features is declarative device management which is a new paradigm where the management will allow MDM servers to describe the right configuration to the device and let the device handle the implementation/execution. As previously mentioned in a post about Apple WWDC, we firmly believe that declarative device management will have a major impact on the future of device management. Keep reading to learn more about the new capabilities included in declarative device management.

User Driven User Enrollment

First, a new version of User Enrollment was announced. Before the user can request their enrollment profile, they require authentication against the organization’s MDM service, or against organization IdP, and only then will they be allowed to download their MDM Enrollment profile. This is called user driven user enrollment.

Required App

Another simple yet important feature is the Required App on unsupervised devices. Admins can push one managed app onto an unsupervised device and can be sure that the app cannot be removed. This is installed as part of the initial MDM profile and the consent to install apps is included during the profile installation. This feature is useful for installing an app that is critical for the business functions such as Mobile Threat Defense, a VPN app, or any other enterprise application. This will enhance BYOD security even further and make it easier for admins to manage BYOD devices.

Managed Pasteboard

Managed Pasteboard is a new feature that controls if paste is affected with managed open-in rules. If restrictions are imposed, then the user will see a notification letting them know that pasting is not allowed. This feature helps corporate data and contents better secured by preventing from unauthorized copy and paste.

MacOS Monterey

Apple also announced new features for macOS Monterey and a few of them are exclusive to Apple Silicon and T2 chip devices.

InstallLater for Software Update

In previous releases, admins were given just a few options to help keep devices up to date where admins can issue a blanket delay on updates for a period to allow for testing. In case a user does not install updates then admins can use the MDM command to InstallASAP. In macOS Monterey, there are some changes where the admin is allowed to set a number of deferrals that a user can use to push back their own update, and then also enforce an update after a given number of deferrals. InstallLater makes the machine update at night, silently and automatically, while users are away from work devices providing convenience with no interruption, leading to an even better user experience. IT admins are also given the flexibility to push updates onto managed Mac devices with this enhancement.

Device Lock Command

Device lock command on Macs has been enhanced with Apple silicon. Admins can now send six-digit pin codes, lock screen messages (optional) and phone numbers (optional) to the device. This will cause the device to reboot and present a user with information provided bringing feature parity across all Mac models. With remote lock in place, the user is unable to use their device until the pin is provided. Once the pin is entered, the device will reboot with all data intact and will be ready for login.

Erase Device Command

In MacOS Monterey, the erase all contents from settings for the Apple silicon and T2 chip devices will be available for quick return to service. This feature will be available via MDM as well. Sending the Erase Device Command will erase all user data and reboot back to the setup assistant making the device ready for the next user in minutes. That allows IT admins to save time refreshing a used device for a new user by eliminating a very time-consuming set up task. On devices with Apple silicon, this will also reset any security settings that have been modified in recovery. For Enterprises, the allowEraseContentAndSettings restriction will be available.

Removable System Extension

Apple added a few kernel extension enhancements along with a new feature called Removable System Extension where the feature will allow the app to deactivate its own system extension. This feature does not require an admin password to remove the system extension. This mainly is used in deployments where the Mac has no AdminUser.

Overall, Apple has brought a lot of important management and security features across iOS, iPadOS, watchOS and macOS while bringing a balance between privacy, user agency and administrative control which makes a great device management solution. We will continue to find new ways to integrate these new features into our UEM platform.

Ivanti Delivers Day Zero Compatibility for iOS and iPadOS 14.5

Mon, 26 Apr 2021 17:36:50 Z

Here at Ivanti, we are excited about iOS and iPadOS 14.5. I’m pleased to share that we offer zero-day compatibility and key feature support across the Ivanti product portfolio for the new features built into Apple’s updated OS.

Apple is bringing a major change to the integration between the iPhone and the Apple Watch. iOS 14.5 introduces the ability to unlock your Face ID enabled phone with an associated Apple Watch. While this is a great feature for the end user, enterprise admins may want to control this to ensure the security of the managed device and data. Apple originally debuted Auto Unlock for Mac, and with its arrival in iOS 14.5 admins have the ability to disable Auto Unlock for iPhone on a managed device.

In addition to supporting the allow Auto Unlock for iPhone restriction, Ivanti also supports additional security restrictions such as:

Unpaired External Boot To Recovery restriction where devices can be booted into recovery by an unpaired device.
Force On Device Only Dictation restriction that allows the admin to prevent dictated content from being sent to Siri servers for processing.

Apart from support for the above features, Ivanti is also working actively to make other new iOS and iPadOS14.5 features available in our upcoming releases so customers can take advantage of the new capabilities.

At Ivanti, we are committed to providing excellent customer service and support. We look forward to helping our customers leverage the full potential of the updates in iOS and iPadOS14.5.