Skip to main content
Pricing
Sign inRequest demo

FedRAMP 20x Historical VER Activity Example

See how recent active and accepted vulnerability records can be assembled into an automation-friendly historical VER snapshot.

0 downloads|ZIP (HTML + JSON)|4.8 KB

What's inside

  • Understand the purpose of a historical VER retrieval view
  • Combine active and accepted records without losing their distinction
  • Prototype automated retrieval and status reconciliation
  • Recognize the difference between a snapshot and a full event history

Best fit

  • Security data-platform teams
  • Vulnerability program managers
  • Agency monitoring and automation teams

Related topics

#Accepted Vulnerabilities#Active Vulnerabilities#Automated Retrieval#FedRAMP 20x#Historical VER Activity#Vulnerability Evaluation and Reporting (VER)#Vulnerability History

Unlock this resource

Enter your work email to download FedRAMP 20x Historical VER Activity Example.

A combined vulnerability snapshot

FedRAMP calls this artifact Historical Vulnerability Evaluation and Reporting Activity. The worked pair combines three synthetic active vulnerability records and three synthetic accepted vulnerability records in one generated snapshot.

The active collection carries detection, reachability, exploitability, evaluation, description, and rating fields. The accepted collection carries similar technical context plus acceptance rationale and senior-official acceptance. Keeping those groups separate lets consumers distinguish findings progressing through response work from risks being carried through an explicit acceptance decision. JSON is suited to automated retrieval, inventory reconciliation, and change detection; HTML makes the same snapshot readable without a consuming system.

What history means here

Use this example to design questions a retrieval workflow should answer: Which records are new? Which changed rating or disposition? Did an active item become accepted? Is an accepted item still present at the next cutoff? Does the human-readable output match the API response?

The included file is a point-in-time aggregation, not a complete event ledger. It does not independently show every transition, rating change, mitigation, closure, or removal before generation. A production historical service may need dated snapshots, immutable change events, stable identifiers, and reconciliation rules so reviewers can reconstruct how each record evolved. Applicability and update cadence vary by Certification Class; confirm current requirements instead of inferring a cadence from this one dated example.

Synthetic example and current status

All vulnerabilities, timestamps, components, ratings, acceptance rationales, decisions, and officials in these 2026-07-27 files are fictional. The pair is not an export of Boundera's live vulnerability-management or production-security systems. Use the official FedRAMP Marketplace record for current information.

Frequently asked questions

How is this different from the Vulnerability Detail Report?

It combines active and accepted records into one retrieval-oriented snapshot instead of reporting only the period's non-accepted findings.

Is this a complete vulnerability audit trail?

No. It is a point-in-time snapshot, not a full sequence of every state transition.

Why provide JSON and HTML?

JSON supports automation, while HTML gives reviewers a readable representation of the same snapshot.

Put this resource to work

Turn this resource into a live FedRAMP workflow.

Boundera connects the evidence, gaps, POA&Ms, and continuous monitoring work behind the document.

Request demo

Related resources