Many organizations today assume that Microsoft’s rapidly expanding security portfolio naturally includes everything needed for modern vulnerability and exposure management. But as the attack surface grows - across cloud, on‑premises environments, APIs, IoT, Operational Technology (OT), and external assets - the question becomes less about brand familiarity and more about capability and coverage.
Here we clarify how Holm Security provides meaningful value for organizations that need complete, high‑fidelity vulnerability management rather than partial visibility - and address the common question: Is Microsoft Defender enough for vulnerability management?
Microsoft has played an enormous role in shaping modern computing. The launch of Windows 95 in 1995 was a milestone in the digital era, as it revolutionized personal computing by making PCs accessible to the masses through a user-friendly interface - but it has also consistently been one of the largest sources of new software vulnerabilities. Public vulnerability databases show that Microsoft products collectively account for more than 13,700 CVEs to date - the highest total of any major vendor.
Recent research points to an ongoing upward trend:
None of this is surprising given Microsoft’s product footprint, but it underscores the need for robust, independent vulnerability management tools - raising the critical question many security teams ask today...
Microsoft offers several security products, but the portfolio is fragmented across licenses, tiers, and add‑ons, making it difficult for many organizations to understand what they have access to.
One of the most referenced products is Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management (MDVM), which has evolved over the years and now offers a more capable tool. However, while MDVM provides useful insights for Microsoft‑centric environments, it does not function as a complete, unified vulnerability and exposure management solution and has several limitations.
Limited visibility across critical attack vectors
A modern vulnerability management platform requires broad attack surface coverage, including web applications, APIs, IoT, Operational Technology (OT), and more. Microsoft offers similar tools, such as External Attack Surface Management (EASM), but MDVM on its own does not provide broad, unified attack surface coverage. Microsoft confirms that these capabilities depend on multiple separate products, each with different licensing requirements, rather than a single, unified vulnerability and exposure management solution.
This alone leads many buyers to wonder: Is Microsoft Defender enough for vulnerability management?
Heavily dependent on Microsoft‑native context
Although MDVM has expanded its capabilities, Microsoft’s risk‑based prioritization relies heavily on Microsoft threat intelligence and Microsoft breach‑likelihood predictions. These are core to MDVM and are explicitly mentioned as key differentiators by Microsoft. This makes MDVM highly effective inside the Microsoft ecosystem, but less capable of independently assessing risk across non‑Microsoft environments.
Unmanaged and non‑traditional assets remain a blind spot
Microsoft states that MDVM can detect risks across managed and unmanaged endpoints using built‑in modules and agentless scanners, but its documentation only covers endpoint and network‑device discovery - not broader asset types like external web apps, APIs, OT/IoT systems, or public‑facing infrastructure. These areas require different Microsoft tools and even then, do not integrate into a single, unified vulnerability management experience.
Fragmented across products
Microsoft explicitly notes that MDVM lives under Exposure Management in the Defender portal. This reinforces the reality that MDVM is one important component of the Microsoft ecosystem but not a full vulnerability and exposure management platform on its own, requiring multiple additional tools to provide holistic coverage.
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is a strong endpoint‑centric vulnerability tool - especially for organizations working in the Microsoft ecosystem. However, organizations looking for full‑spectrum, unified vulnerability and exposure management still face meaningful gaps in Microsoft’s approach. Attack vectors such as APIs, web apps, OT/IoT, shadow IT, and non‑Microsoft infrastructure require separate Microsoft tools or remain only partially covered.
This is where Holm Security delivers clear, differentiated value: holistic attack surface coverage without stitching together multiple products. A unified platform without fragmented modules that consolidates discovery, scanning, prioritization, remediation, and reporting. Holm Security provides independent, vendor‑agnostic risk visibility, free from ecosystem bias.
In short: Microsoft offers strong vulnerability management capabilities - but not a full vulnerability & exposure management platform. Holm Security does.
To learn more about how Holm Security compares - and to answer the question “Is Microsoft Defender enough for vulnerability management?” - explore our detailed comparison.