10 TPRM Questions You Aren’t Asking — but Should Be

Your biggest security threat might not be within your company — it could come from your vendors. 

According to SecurityScorecard, third-party attacks now account for 29% of all security breaches — and an overwhelming 98% of organizations are connected to a vendor that’s already been compromised. For enterprises managing hundreds (or even thousands) of third- and fourth-party vendors, that risk multiplies fast — especially as cyberattacks grow more sophisticated.

That’s why Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) has become a cornerstone of modern enterprise security — and why your security questionnaire needs to evolve with today’s threats.

What is TPRM?

Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM) is the process organizations use to identify, assess, and mitigate risks associated with external vendors, partners, and service providers. As companies rely more heavily on third parties for critical operations, TPRM strategies often include vendor risk assessments, contract reviews, ongoing monitoring, and compliance audits.

Why are Security Questionnaires Critical for TPRM?

A core component of TPRM is the security questionnaire, which helps organizations evaluate a vendor’s security posture, data protection practices, and ability to meet regulatory requirements. Security questionnaires provide structured insight into potential vulnerabilities before a partnership is formalized and throughout the vendor lifecycle. Without them, businesses risk exposing sensitive data or systems to unknown threats embedded in their supply chain.

Why TPRM Needs to Evolve with Emerging Threats

Enterprises should review and update their security questionnaires at least annually, but ideally every 6–12 months, depending on the organization’s risk tolerance, industry, and regulatory environment. However, they should also be updated ad hoc when significant shifts occur — such as the emergence of new threats (e.g., AI-enabled phishing), changes in data privacy laws (e.g., new state-level U.S. regulations or international frameworks like NIS2), or major incidents that reveal systemic vendor vulnerabilities.

A practical cadence might look like this:

• Annually: Full review for relevance, clarity, and alignment with internal policies and frameworks (e.g., NIST, ISO 27001).
• Quarterly: Light review to incorporate new threat intelligence, regulatory shifts, or industry-specific risks.
• Immediately: Following any major breach (internal or third-party), or when adopting new technologies like LLMs, IoT, or cloud services.

Ultimately, the most effective TPRM programs treat the security questionnaire as a living document — not a one-and-done checklist.

Emerging Threats Impacting TPRM in 2025

1. AI-Powered Social Engineering and Deepfakes

Generative AI has escalated phishing and impersonation attacks in both volume and sophistication. Deepfake audio and video are being used to spoof executives and manipulate financial transactions. Third parties may be especially vulnerable if they lack robust identity verification protocols.

TPRM Implication: Ask about social engineering training, real-time identity validation, and protection against impersonation attempts.

2. Software Supply Chain Attacks

Threat actors are increasingly targeting vendors’ CI/CD pipelines, open-source dependencies, and third-party libraries. These are harder to detect and often propagate across ecosystems unnoticed.

TPRM Implication: Evaluate vendors on their secure development lifecycle (SDLC), SBOM (software bill of materials) usage, and dependency management policies.

3. Shadow AI and Unauthorized Tool Use

Employees or teams at third-party vendors may be using unvetted AI tools (e.g., AI copilots, code generators, chatbots) that introduce data leakage or compliance risks.

TPRM Implication: Assess internal policies for AI tool usage, AI governance frameworks, and controls to detect and manage unauthorized tools.

4. Data Residency and Cross-Border Privacy Conflicts

New or evolving privacy laws (e.g., India’s DPDP Act, EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework updates, China’s PIPL) are making it harder for vendors to manage data flows across jurisdictions without risking violations.

TPRM Implication: Confirm that vendors track where data is stored, processed, and accessed — and comply with relevant cross-border regulations.

5. Vendor Consolidation and M&A Risk

Vendor mergers and acquisitions can introduce new risks — such as data being handled under different standards or by previously unknown parties.

TPRM Implication: Ask vendors how they notify clients of organizational changes and how risk is reassessed post-M&A.

6. Critical Infrastructure and OT (Operational Technology) Vulnerabilities

Vendors supporting manufacturing, utilities, or logistics often operate outdated OT systems that are vulnerable to cyberattacks.

TPRM Implication: Ensure that vendors assess and segment OT risks and don’t expose IT environments to operational vulnerabilities.

10 Overlooked — but Essential — TPRM Questions 

If you haven’t revisited your vendor risk assessment to account for today’s threat landscape, you may be missing critical gaps in your third-party risk program. Here are ten high-impact questions you may have overlooked:

1. How do you monitor for and respond to AI-generated threats or deepfake-based social engineering?

Why it matters: Generative AI has made it easier and faster for attackers to impersonate executives or launch hyper-targeted phishing campaigns. If vendors aren’t prepared, they may unknowingly become the weakest link in your ecosystem.

What to look for: Security awareness training that includes AI-enabled threats, layered identity verification (e.g., voice or video authentication), and monitoring for anomalous behavior.

Red flags:

• “We haven’t encountered that yet.”
• “We rely on traditional phishing detection.”
• No mention of training or identity validation updates in the last year.

2. Can you provide examples of how you’ve handled a third-party data breach in your own supply chain?

Why it matters: Even if your vendor has strong controls, their vendors might not. How they respond to a breach beyond their walls shows operational maturity and transparency.

What to look for: Detailed incident response examples, timelines, post-incident audits, and communication logs with impacted customers or regulators.

Red flags:

• “We’ve never had to respond to one.”
• Generic statements about having a plan, but no specifics.
• No lessons learned or corrective actions taken.

3. What steps do you take to protect against session hijacking and token theft in cloud-based applications?

Why it matters: Session hijacking bypasses authentication entirely, and it’s increasingly exploited in cloud environments. Vendors that overlook this put your data at risk, even if MFA is enabled.

What to look for: Short token expiration times, token binding, anomaly detection, device fingerprinting, and user behavior monitoring.

Red flags:

• “We use OAuth2” with no mention of additional safeguards.
• No ability to revoke sessions dynamically.
• Lack of telemetry or logging for token misuse.

4. How frequently do you retrain your models and update your detection systems to account for zero-day threats or novel attack techniques?

Why it matters: Security tools and threat models become outdated quickly. If your vendor isn’t continuously adapting, you’re relying on stale defenses.

What to look for: A cadence for retraining (e.g., quarterly), use of threat intelligence feeds, and integration with MITRE ATT&CK or similar frameworks.

Red flags:

• “We update when needed.”
• No formal update schedule.
• Relying solely on out-of-the-box vendor threat intelligence.

5. How do you ensure employees and contractors aren’t circumventing approved communication or storage tools (shadow IT)?

Why it matters: Unauthorized tools (like personal email, chat apps, or AI assistants) can create blind spots for data leakage and compliance violations.

What to look for: Device monitoring, endpoint DLP (data loss prevention), internal audits, and policies that restrict or flag unsanctioned tool usage.

Red flags:

• No tracking of unsanctioned app usage.
• “We trust our employees.”
• Lack of monitoring on BYOD (bring your own device) systems.

6. Do you have a formal disinformation or reputational attack response plan?

Why it matters: A coordinated disinformation campaign can erode trust and have operational or financial fallout — even without a data breach. This is especially relevant for public-facing, infrastructure, or financial vendors.

What to look for: Crisis communication playbooks, real-time social and media monitoring, and alignment between legal, PR, and security teams.

Red flags:

• “We handle that through PR.”
• No connection between security incidents and brand response.
• No media monitoring or simulation exercises.

7. How are you securing machine identities, service accounts, and non-human credentials?

Why it matters: Machine identities often have elevated privileges and are poorly monitored, making them attractive targets for attackers or insider abuse.

What to look for: Use of secrets management tools (e.g., HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager), credential rotation policies, and role-based access controls.

Red flags:

• Hardcoded credentials or long-lived tokens.
• No audit trail for non-human access.
• No inventory of service accounts.

8. What internal KPIs or SLAs do you track around secure development lifecycle (SDLC) practices?

Why it matters: Anyone can say they follow secure coding best practices — but if they’re not measuring success, there’s likely a gap between policy and practice.

What to look for: Time-to-fix metrics for vulnerabilities, percentage of code covered by security testing, and developer security training completion rates.

Red flags:

• No defined security metrics.
• Infrequent or manual code reviews.
• No integration of security into CI/CD pipelines.

9. How do you ensure ethical and regulatory compliance in AI usage across your services?

Why it matters: AI systems can inadvertently introduce bias, misuse customer data, or violate laws like the EU AI Act or HIPAA. Many vendors use AI tools without clear governance.

What to look for: Internal AI policies, explainability protocols, compliance reviews, and documentation of AI tool use cases.

Red flags:

• “We’re experimenting with AI” with no oversight.
• No responsible AI policy or legal review.
• Lack of transparency around training data or outputs.

10. What controls do you have to ensure former employees and contractors no longer have access to critical systems or data?

Why it matters: Failure to revoke access is one of the most common causes of insider threat and data exposure — especially among distributed or remote vendors.

What to look for: Automated offboarding workflows, immediate access deprovisioning, and periodic audits of active credentials.

Red flags:

• Manual deactivation with no checklist.
• “We deactivate access when HR notifies us.”
• No routine review of access permissions.

Future Proof Your TPRM with SecurityPal

The threat landscape is evolving fast — and so should your TPRM approach. By revisiting and expanding your vendor security questionnaires, you can stay ahead of emerging risks and build stronger, more resilient partnerships.

Need help operationalizing or scaling your TPRM? Contact us.