Common Security Gaps Revealed by Breach Attack Simulation (BAS)

When organizations think about cyber risk, they often imagine advanced zero-day exploits or highly targeted state-sponsored attacks. While those threats are real, Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) frequently uncovers a different reality: many breaches begin with basic, preventable weaknesses.

Aquila I’s BAS platform automates the process of finding these weaknesses—running continuous, safe simulations to reveal vulnerabilities attackers could easily exploit. From email gateway misconfigurations to endpoint verification failures, BAS exposes the hidden cracks in your cyber defenses before attackers do.

In this blog, we’ll cover:

• The top recurring security gaps uncovered by BAS in 2025

• Why these gaps persist even in mature security programs

• Industry-specific examples

• How to remediate them quickly

• How BAS integrates with the MITRE ATT&CK Framework for tracking and fixing issues
  

Top Security Gaps Revealed by BAS

1. Misconfigured Email Gateways

Even with advanced secure email gateway solutions, misconfigurations happen. BAS simulations often reveal phishing emails with malicious attachments or embedded links bypassing filters—usually due to overly permissive rules or untested update changes.

Example: A BFSI organization ran an email security validation simulation and found executable files disguised as PDFs bypassing its filter. The rules were updated the same day.

2. Missing or Weak Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)

BAS often finds accounts—sometimes privileged ones—without MFA protection. In 2025, this remains one of the easiest ways attackers gain unauthorized access.

Example: BAS testing at a healthcare provider uncovered several privileged accounts without MFA, excluded from policy due to “legacy system compatibility.”

3. Unpatched or Outdated Systems

Even with patch management processes, BAS uncovers endpoints or servers running outdated software—often due to update failures or offline devices during patch cycles.

Example: Endpoint verification simulations at a manufacturing firm revealed 14% of devices missing a critical security patch for a widely exploited vulnerability.

4. Poor Network Segmentation

Flat networks allow attackers to move laterally without barriers. BAS lateral movement simulations often reveal how quickly an attacker could escalate privileges or reach sensitive systems after initial compromise.

5. Insufficient Endpoint Security

BAS simulates malware infections or demo payloads to test EDR configurations. Common findings include disabled agents, outdated signatures, or alert rules that fail to trigger.

Why These Gaps Persist

• Human Error – Misconfigurations during system changes or updates.

• Lack of Continuous Testing – Without BAS, gaps remain hidden until exploited.

• Complex Environments – Large hybrid networks increase the likelihood of missed assets.

• Overreliance on Vendor Defaults – Assuming default settings are optimal for every environment.
  

Industry-Specific Examples

BFSI – Email Gateway Misconfiguration A bank’s BAS simulation revealed that HTML-based phishing emails were bypassing link scanning due to a policy change for “trusted senders.”

Healthcare – Endpoint Verification Failure A hospital network found that 10% of devices lacked EDR entirely because of a failed software deployment.

Manufacturing – Lateral Movement Risk BAS revealed that once an attacker compromised a single workstation, they could reach production control systems in under 30 minutes due to poor segmentation.

How BAS Maps and Fixes Gaps

Mapping to MITRE ATT&CK Framework. Each BAS finding is aligned to relevant MITRE tactics and techniques, giving teams visibility into which stages of the attack lifecycle need improvement.

The Remediation Loop

1. BAS identifies the gap.

2. SOC applies the fix.

3. BAS retests immediately.

4. Results are mapped back to MITRE for tracking.
   

Remediation Prioritization with BAS Risk scoring ensures teams focus on the most impactful vulnerabilities first—like an internet-facing unpatched server over a low-risk internal issue.

How to Prevent Recurrence

• Run Continuous BAS Testing – Daily for critical controls (email, endpoint), monthly for broader coverage.

• Integrate BAS into Change Management – Test every configuration change before going live.

• Use Red Teaming as a Final Validation – Combine automated BAS with manual red team assessments for maximum assurance.
  

Future Trends in BAS Gap Analysis

• AI-Driven Predictive BAS – Forecasting which gaps are most likely to be exploited in your industry.

• Micro Secure Vision Dashboards – Real-time visualization of vulnerabilities across network, cloud, and endpoint layers.

• Automated Remediation Playbooks – BAS detects a gap and triggers immediate policy/configuration changes without human intervention.
  

Conclusion

The largest breaches often start with small, preventable gaps. Aquila I’s Breach and Attack Simulation platform finds these issues—before attackers do—so they can be fixed fast.

Whether it’s a secure email gateway misconfiguration, a missing EDR agent, or an unpatched server, BAS ensures no weakness remains hidden for long.

Make BAS part of your daily cybersecurity operations. Book a Live BAS Demo with Aquila I and start closing your most critical security gaps—before they’re exploited.