When the System Breaks: What the NIST NVD Audit Means for Software Security

In May 2025, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) released a memo announcing an audit of NIST’s management of the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The memo outlines the scope of an investigation into delays, operational challenges, and oversight concerns that may affect the reliability of the U.S. government's central vulnerability tracking system.

While the audit itself is still underway and no formal findings have been released, its launch signals the growing seriousness of the disruption.

This blog unpacks why the audit matters, how it affects organizations managing vulnerability risk, especially those with legacy software, and why relying solely on the NVD is no longer sufficient.

‍

Why the Audit is Necessary

The audit was prompted by growing concerns across the security community, including:

• Delayed processing of CVEs: Thousands of known vulnerabilities have lacked timely analysis or enrichment in the NVD since early 2024.
  
  
• Operational opacity: There is limited public visibility into how NVD triages, prioritizes, or assigns CVEs for deeper analysis.
  
  
• Concerns over oversight and contractor management: Some have raised questions about NIST’s staffing structure and reliance on external contractors—issues the audit may explore.
  
  
• Compliance risks: If critical vulnerabilities go unprocessed, it raises questions about whether NVD operations align with standards such as FISMA and OMB A-130.
  
  

The audit's objective is to determine whether NIST is effectively managing the submission volume to the NVD and has implemented strategies to reduce the backlog and prevent future processing delays.

‍

Why This Matters

Many organizations, particularly those in regulated industries like finance, healthcare, and government, rely on timely vulnerability data to maintain compliance and reduce risk. For years, the NVD has served as the authoritative federal source for this data.

But when the database itself is incomplete, lagging, or poorly maintained, it introduces new risk:

• Vulnerabilities go unflagged for longer
  
  
• Compliance scans may miss or misclassify exposure
  
  
• Security programs become less effective, not due to negligence, but due to unreliable infrastructure

This is especially problematic for teams working with end-of-life (EOL) software. When the systems you're running are no longer supported by their original maintainers—and the official vulnerability feed is delayed—your exposure increases significantly.

‍

The Implications for Legacy Software

At HeroDevs, we specialize in supporting open-source technologies that have reached end of life. We’ve seen firsthand how vulnerable EOL systems become when security data is fragmented or delayed.

Take AngularJS or Node.js 12. Without maintained dependencies and timely CVE tracking, teams using these frameworks face:

• Audit risk: CVEs can remain open or unaddressed
  
  
• Security gaps: Delays in identifying and patching active threats
  
  
• Blocked upgrades: Compliance teams may halt deployments or force migrations
  
  

These are real-world outcomes of a centralized system not keeping pace with the needs of the software it aims to protect.

‍

What We’re Doing Differently

HeroDevs Never-Ending Support (NES) fills this gap by independently monitoring, validating, and patching EOL software, regardless of NVD status.

For example:

• Never-Ending Support (NES) keeps you compliant, secure, and audit-ready without an unplanned migration or risky patchwork.
  
  
• We patch CVEs based on multiple sources—including NVD, vendor announcements, researcher disclosures, and our own proactive monitoring.
  
  
• When the NVD lags, our customers still get patches. Security doesn’t stop because the database does.
  
  

‍

Final Thought: NVD Isn’t Enough Anymore

The launch of this audit marks a critical inflection point for the broader software security ecosystem. Your security posture is only as strong as the systems and infrastructure you rely on—including the databases meant to inform your risk assessments.

If your organization is running legacy or unsupported applications, relying exclusively on upstream sources like the NVD is no longer a viable strategy. Supplementing that with maintained, secure, and continuously supported alternatives is not just a precaution—it’s a requirement for staying safe and compliant.

‍