Agent vs. Agentless, Which Patch Management Solution is Best for Your Business

Patch management is crucial to any business. There are two general approaches: agent and agentless monitoring.

Agent-based solutions, which install small bits of software on endpoints, may be ideal for organizations with large device ecosystems, which occasionally operate in offline environments or that must meet higher cybersecurity standards.

Agentless solutions work better for smaller organizations that lack the resources to manage agents and those with extensive legacy systems that may not be compatible with them.

1. Agent vs Agentless Patch Management: Explained

Consumers are generally familiar with patches: An app or software may request that you update it to have the latest patch. Patching is even more critical for enterprises: fix bugs, address security or data privacy vulnerabilities, and even introduce quality-of-life improvements or new features.

There are two basic ways to handle patch management: agent and agentless monitoring.

Agent-based patch management solutions rely on an agent, a small software program installed on endpoints like company-issued mobile devices. These agents can monitor endpoints in real time, determine whether patches are needed, and install them, communicating with the central server throughout these processes.

Agent-based patch management is ideal for organizations with large mobile device ecosystems because they can operate offline, be scheduled around employee work hours, and report on the status of patches, such as through patch walls and patch update histories.

Agentless patch management solutions do not use agents; they administer the patches directly from the central server. This approach is more straightforward to deploy and manage because no software is installed on the endpoints. However, there are numerous downsides, such as the fact that endpoints need to maintain a network connection to receive patches and a lack of flexibility in patch scheduling and other configurations. Agentless monitoring can also not be done in real-time.

2. Agent-based vs Agentless: Which Solution is Best for Your Business

There is no definitive superior choice between agent and agentless monitoring. Some businesses will work better with agent-based patch management. Others will do better with agentless patch management.

Businesses should ask several key questions to determine what is best for them.

Does your business need real-time monitoring?

Businesses in some industries must monitor their endpoints in real time for security and compliance. Examples include banking, healthcare, and utilities, which are common targets for cyber attacks and must meet strict regulatory standards.

If your business falls into this sector, agent-based patch management is the way to go. Because the agents constantly contact the central server, companies can monitor their endpoints in real time. They will know immediately when a device has software or apps that need to be patched and can do so without delay.

Does your business operate in offline environments?

Agents store updates locally. Because of this ability, they can apply patches even when the device is offline and synchronize with the central server later.

While this feature may seem extraneous, plenty of businesses operate in offline environments where it would be crucial. For example, companies in mining, defense, forestry, and shipping often operate in settings where connectivity is limited. Others may intentionally limit connectivity for safety, such as diplomatic sites or correctional facilities. All of these businesses would benefit from agent-based patch management so that the agent can patch the software or app and then synchronize later once online.

The critical two questions

Many businesses mistakenly begin canvassing for a patch management solution before asking those two critical questions. As a result, a company that operates in an offline environment or needs real-time monitoring may mistakenly procure an agentless solution that is not ideal for them.

Any business needing either of those requirements should generally opt for an agent-based solution. An agentless patch management solution may work better if a company does not need to go offline or do real-time monitoring.

An agentless patch management solution is especially ideal for businesses that do not have the resources to manage agents, such as the IT personnel to deploy and maintain them. Agentless patch management may also work better for companies with extensive legacy systems that may not be compatible with agents and those that operate on bring-your-own-device (BYOD), so no software will need to be installed on personal devices.

3. Security Concerns

3.1Security Concerns with agentless patch management

Agentless patch management presents several advantages. For example, it is easier to deploy because there is no need to install agents. It also has less network overhead because there is no continuous communication between the endpoints and the central server. However, these advantages come with a major trade-off: security.

With agentless monitoring, the organization’s security is at greater risk.

Riskier access control with agentless monitoring

With agentless patch management, IT managers will need elevated permissions. Due to a lack of agents at endpoints, the patch management solution must connect with each device through standard network protocols. Therefore, actions in an agentless patch management solution will be system-wide, such as an administrator updating configuration files for all devices.

There is a much greater risk when IT managers have elevated permissions as part of access control. Hackers can steal their credentials or gain control of the patch management solution and immediately have the same privileges.

Lateral movement in agentless monitoring

Hackers may attack the patch management solution simply because it is easier to do so and has a broader attack surface. The end goal, however, may not necessarily be to assume control of the patch management solution. It is an entry point to access other organization networks that may yield more sensitive or valuable information.

This approach is known as lateral movement. For example, upon gaining access to the endpoints and patch management solution, the hackers may move laterally to the organization’s customer databases. The goal may be to threaten data leakage as part of a ransomware attack.

Organizations can undoubtedly maintain strong cyber defense with agentless monitoring, but they must keep these risks in mind.

3.2Security Concerns with Agent-based Patch Management

Agent-based patch management is also susceptible to various threats.

Agent misuse or impersonation

Disgruntled employees, such as IT administrators with elevated permissions, may misuse agents to harm the company. For instance, they could install agents that carry a payload of malware rather than an actual fix. Businesses need to log all actions by employees with access to deter this possibility.

If the company has weak authentication systems, sophisticated hackers can also impersonate agents and gain unauthorized access to endpoints and networks. Businesses need to strengthen their security with robust authentication mechanisms.

Traffic is prone to abuse

There are two ways to abuse network traffic. Hackers can steal sensitive information if the communication between the central server and its agents is not encrypted. Hackers could also overload the network with excessive traffic, creating a denial-of-service attack that limits the availability of the agent-based patch management system. Businesses need to encrypt communication and monitor network traffic for any signs of false activity.

Agents can fail

Agents can occasionally fail to install necessary patches. Such failure results in inconsistent patches across the organization, which creates an inconsistent security environment. Some endpoints will be safe from the vulnerabilities addressed by patches, while others will not.

To mitigate these problems, businesses need a patch management solution that offers a patch wall, allowing companies to identify endpoints with missing or failed patches.

4. Features to Look for in Agent-based Patch Management Solutions

If your IT team has decided that an agent-based solution is the best choice for your business, your work is not yet done. With so many agent-based patch management solutions available on the market, IT teams need to take their time to pick the best.

Ease of creating patch management policy

The advantages of agent-based patch management are negated if the corresponding software is challenging to use. The solution must make it easy for businesses to scan, deploy, audit, and revise their patch management policy.

On AirDroid Business, this process is simple. A centralized management dashboard enables administrators to effectively prevent and address vulnerabilities, ensuring that patch management policies align with their dynamic security, compliance, and business requirements.

Automated patching

A business may want to consider many features as part of its patch management policy. One of the most important may be automated patching, which becomes more accessible to define when you consider its alternative. At most organizations, IT managers need to identify which patches should be installed and determine a schedule for installing them.

In contrast, with automated patching, no human is in the loop. Instead, the IT manager will set the types and amount of endpoints that need patching in advance, along with what stages they will need assistance for, such as deployment or testing. The IT manager then sets the conditions for patching, such as on weeknights or weekends, so as not to cause operational disruption. Upon setting the automated patching, IT managers must monitor the patch management to ensure it works correctly.

Transparency-related patching features

Since patching is a business-critical feature, there must be transparency regarding how it is done. A key feature to look for in this regard is a patch wall, which displays missing or failed patches. This information is crucial because patching is often done to address software vulnerabilities. Endpoints without the latest patches will thus have the underlying vulnerability. Identifying these endpoints will enable IT managers to reinstall the failed patch or add the missing one.

Another essential feature for patching transparency is a patch update history. This feature may be considered the post-patch counterpart to a patch wall: It tells IT managers what patches have been successfully installed.

This information provided by a patch update history is crucial for several reasons. It can help businesses show they are following best security practices for compliance. It can enable IT managers to determine whether any patches correlate with system issues—they often introduce unintended consequences separate from the gap they were meant to address. Finally, a patch update history can help businesses optimize their patching practices, such as determining the best time to conduct them.

5. Deciding between Agent and Agentless Monitoring

As stated throughout this article, there is no one-size-fits-all solution between agent and agentless monitoring. Some businesses will fare better with agentless monitoring. Others, however, will do better with agent-based monitoring.

Agent-based monitoring may be ideal for businesses with a large number of endpoints, such as company-issued devices, that need real-time monitoring and work in offline environments.

For these organizations, agent-based monitoring may be a better fit than agentless, which presents risks due to escalated permissions in access control and the possibility of lateral movement if the IT administrator’s credentials are compromised or the patch management solution is breached.

Choosing an agent-based solution is challenging. Organizations must prioritize three key features: ease of use in crafting and updating patch management policies, the ability to automatically deploy patches through automated patching, and the patch wall and patch histories that provide much-needed transparency into these workflows.

With the right agent-based patch management solution in place, businesses will adhere to relevant compliance, work more productively, and remain at the cutting edge of safety and security.