# idemeum > AI agents that autonomously resolve IT issues on endpoints and in the cloud. idemeum has two product lines: AI agents for IT (Assist and Automate) and Endpoint Control (Application Allowlisting, Endpoint Privilege Management, and Just-in-time Admin Access). --- # What is application allowlisting? Source: https://idemeum.com/blog/what-is-application-allowlisting Published: 2026-01-21 Category: Endpoint Control Author: Nik Poturnak, Co-founder, CEO > Allowlisting lets only approved applications run and blocks everything else by default. Here's how it compares to blocklisting, and why it fits Zero Trust. ## What is allowlisting? In today’s cybersecurity landscape, blocking malware and untrusted software demands more than reactive antivirus measures. Application allowlisting, where only trusted software is permitted to run, offers a robust “default-deny” security posture. Application allowlisting ensures that only trusted applications can execute on a device. idemeum’s agent intercepts every process launch; if an application lacks an explicit allow rule, execution is denied. This proactive “Zero Trust for executables” model blocks ransomware, unknown software, and lateral movement. Unlike blocklists that try to catch bad actors, allowlisting denies all by default and grants access only to verified software, drastically reducing the attack surface. ## Allowlisting vs. blocklisting You may also see this called application whitelisting. It’s the same idea, but the security industry has moved to “allowlisting” and “blocklisting” (or “denylisting”). The UK’s [National Cyber Security Centre](https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/blog-post/terminology-its-not-black-and-white) explains why: tying “white” to safe and “black” to dangerous adds nothing when plainer words say exactly what each list does. The real difference is what happens to software nobody has reviewed. A blocklist, the approach behind traditional antivirus, stops only what’s on its list of known bad files, so anything it doesn’t recognize is allowed to run. An allowlist works the other way around: only software on the list can run, and anything it doesn’t recognize is blocked. That’s why allowlisting also stops new malware no one has seen yet, which a blocklist can’t catch until its list is updated. ## Which approach aligns with Zero Trust? Blocklisting and allowlisting are both forms of application control, but only allowlisting follows the Zero Trust principle of “never trust, always verify.” No application is trusted by default, and each one runs only when an explicit rule allows it, so every user, device, and application gets only the access it needs. CISA’s [#StopRansomware Guide](https://www.cisa.gov/stopransomware/ransomware-guide), updated in May 2023, puts it plainly: “Use allowlisting rather than attempting to list and deny every possible permutation of applications in a network environment.” ## Use cases | **Use case** | **Description** | | --- | --- | | Ransomware defense | Block unknown binaries and scripts from executing, even if they’re downloaded by a trusted process. | | Regulatory compliance | Enforce strict control for HIPAA, PCI-DSS, and NIST standards. | | Least privilege access | Combine with [Endpoint Privilege Management (EPM)](https://idemeum.com/endpoint-privilege-management) to remove admin rights while keeping teams productive. | | Audit | Get full visibility into what’s executed across your fleet, instantly and historically. | ## Application Allowlisting in idemeum Traditional allowlisting approaches are known for being rigid, hard to manage, and a heavy operational load for IT and MSP teams. This is where idemeum brings innovation: a simple, intelligent, and scalable solution that makes allowlisting practical for real-world use. | **Feature** | **Description** | | --- | --- | | Default deny with OS trust | idemeum automatically trusts essential Windows system binaries (OSBinary), ensuring no disruption to core operations. At the same time, it blocks signed but dangerous executables like `mshta.exe` or `powershell.exe`, often exploited in fileless attacks. | | Powerful and flexible rule engine | Define rules by file path, filename, SHA-256 hash, publisher certificate, or regex patterns. Match criteria using certificate metadata like Common Name (CN), Organization (O), and Organizational Unit (OU). | | One-click catalog rules | idemeum provides a pre-built catalog of trusted applications like Slack, Notepad, Zoom, and more. These rules are kept up to date and can be applied instantly to reduce manual effort. | | Real-time audit and event-based rules | Every MSI and EXE execution is logged and uploaded to the cloud within minutes. Admins can view these events and generate allow/deny rules directly from the UI, closing the loop on what users are running. | | Integrated privilege management | idemeum’s Application Allowlisting integrates tightly with Endpoint Privilege Management (EPM). A single rule can allow execution and elevate privileges without granting full local admin access, bridging the gap between security and usability. | | Child process trust inheritance | When a trusted app launches a subprocess, trust can be inherited automatically. This prevents legitimate parent-child application chains (e.g., an installer launching a helper binary) from breaking. | | Application fencing controls | Go beyond allowlisting: control what allowed apps can do. Prevent Office apps from launching PowerShell, block browsers from spawning command shells, and isolate potentially risky behaviors. | ## Conclusion Application allowlisting is one of the most powerful defenses against modern threats, but only if it’s implemented in a way that works for both security and operations. idemeum gets it right by combining real-time visibility, flexible policy control, and intelligent defaults. With integrated privilege management, catalog rules, and fine-grained process control, idemeum [modernizes allowlisting](https://idemeum.com/allowlisting) into a scalable, cloud-native capability fit for the Zero Trust era. --- # Why EDR is not enough for endpoint security Source: https://idemeum.com/blog/why-edr-is-not-enough-for-endpoint-security Published: 2026-01-20 Category: Endpoint Control Author: Nik Poturnak, Co-founder, CEO > EDR reacts after an attack starts. Allowlisting stops it before it runs. ## How EDR products work We all started with antivirus products that can only prevent known intrusions based on file digests known as virus signatures. Antivirus products relied on regular updates to their dictionaries of static virus signatures to stay current. Newly released malware, malware that changed its file signature, and attacks designed to be completely fileless regularly outpaced and subverted antivirus. Increases in available computing power and memory allowed us to introduce Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) products that would continuously monitor endpoints. Instead of comparing new files to a list of virus signatures, EDR agents monitored system behavior heuristically. Newly executed processes, registry modifications, and network connection events are combined with shared telemetry collected from other endpoints to correlate system events into patterns of normal user behavior. Behavior that deviated from these patterns, such as abnormal RDP traffic or multiple failed login attempts, could be considered an indicator of compromise (IoC) and flagged for investigation or automated responses. Later, Extended Detection and Response (XDR) was introduced to extend detection and response beyond the individual endpoint. Suspicious events are correlated across multiple technologies, not just endpoint workstations. XDR solutions can ingest data from sensors across disparate devices and networks, enabling automated responses such as blocking suspected malicious network sessions or disabling compromised user accounts. In any case, you see the pattern: XDR or EDR still depends on the approach of detecting first and reacting second. While EDR can tell you when something has happened, it can’t stop it from happening in the first place. ## The limits of detection-based security When an EDR product is deployed, you are operating in a reactive mode. Security teams can only respond to incidents after EDR identifies them and generates an alert, typically after an attack already happened (data exfiltrated or ransomware encrypting files). What is more, modern intrusions routinely subvert detection altogether by leveraging fileless malware and Living-off-the-Land (LOTL) techniques. Once deployed, malicious payloads can take seconds to profile and copy sensitive data or encrypt networks with ransomware. As a result, application control or [allowlisting](https://idemeum.com/blog/what-is-application-allowlisting) alongside an EDR is now an operational necessity. ## Attacks that can bypass EDR Here are some examples of the attacks that can bypass EDR detection. With rapid AI adoption and polymorphic malware that rewrites itself on the fly, evasion techniques will continue to get more sophisticated. - **LOTL attacks:** Unlike antivirus software’s reliance on a static dictionary of file signatures, EDR could recognize dynamic attack patterns. Successful recognition, however, relied on identifying anomalous behavior within collected patterns of normal behavior. Attackers learned they could blend in with typical system behavior by leveraging trusted system applications, rather than writing malware as a standalone application binary. - **Fileless malware:** EDR primarily scans for known malicious files on a computer’s hard disk. Fileless malware often operates entirely in memory or uses existing legitimate files, so there is no “malware” file for the EDR to scan or flag. - **Process injection:** Malicious code can be “injected” into a running, legitimate process, so superficially, any malicious behavior appears to originate from that process. System processes are likely already included in an EDR’s list of usual behavior patterns, so any malicious behavior performed by them may not appear abnormal and suspicious. ## How prevention closes the detection gap Defense against cyberattacks is an arms race. The more advanced the attack, the more advanced the detection method must become. The more motivated the attacker, the more bespoke the attack is written against the individual victim. Detection products marketed to respond against common attack patterns cannot protect against hyper-customized attacks from motivated adversaries. Application control enables attack prevention by blocking any behavior that isn’t explicitly allowed. Technologies like [application allowlisting](https://idemeum.com/allowlisting) and [just-in-time (JIT) access](https://idemeum.com/just-in-time-admin-access) inherently prevent malicious behavior by limiting actions and access in accordance with the principle of least privilege. idemeum makes implementing allowlisting simple with minimal operational investment. Organizations cannot rely solely on detection. EDR and XDR by themselves cannot keep a network secure against today’s adaptive threat landscape. Prevention must be enforced through application control to stop attacks before they can execute. Detection technologies must be combined with application control to build a comprehensive security ecosystem. --- # The malware problem Source: https://idemeum.com/blog/the-malware-problem Published: 2026-01-19 Category: Security Author: Nik Poturnak, Co-founder, CEO > Ransomware attacks on critical industries surged 34% in 2025, and detection is falling behind. Here’s why prevention has to come first. ## The malware crisis Despite deploying dozens of tools over the years, security teams are struggling to stop malware. And it’s not surprising: global ransomware attacks against critical industries [surged by 34% in 2025](https://industrialcyber.co/reports/half-of-2025-ransomware-attacks-hit-critical-sectors-as-manufacturing-healthcare-and-energy-top-global-targets/). Attackers now use artificial intelligence (AI) for more than productivity: Google’s threat intelligence team has found [AI-enabled malware in active operations](https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/threat-intelligence/threat-actor-usage-of-ai-tools). Defenses are struggling to keep up, and in a CrowdStrike survey, [85% of organizations](https://www.crowdstrike.com/en-us/press-releases/ransomware-report-ai-attacks-outpacing-defenses/) said traditional detection can’t keep pace with AI-enhanced attacks. With AI, these trends are likely to continue, and there is no easy way to catch [half a million new malicious files a day](https://www.kaspersky.com/about/press-releases/the-number-of-the-year-kaspersky-detected-half-a-million-malicious-files-daily-in-2025). We saw this problem firsthand when leading product and engineering at Meta, FireEye, and VMware. We were always playing catch-up with attackers: curating threat intelligence feeds faster, collecting malware samples, reverse engineering them to extract indicators, and detonating samples for dynamic analysis artifacts. It always felt like we were one step behind. ## The cost of getting it wrong Some companies only have the bandwidth and budget to deploy something like an antivirus, knowing full well that there will be dangerous targeted attacks and malware that will bypass this defense. Others deploy an EDR or XDR, but these tools also hit the limits of detection-based security. EDR and XDR platforms detect attacks only after malicious activity has already begun, which means payloads, fileless malware, and credential-based intrusions can execute before a response occurs. What is more, modern intrusions routinely subvert detection altogether by leveraging fileless malware and Living-off-the-Land (LOTL) techniques. Once deployed, malicious payloads can take seconds to profile and copy sensitive data or encrypt networks with ransomware. Defense against cyberattacks is an arms race. The more advanced the attack, the more advanced the detection method must become. The more motivated the attacker, the more bespoke the attack is written against the individual victim. Detection products marketed to respond against common attack patterns cannot protect against hyper-customized attacks from motivated adversaries. In summary, detection-based security falls short. ## Where do we go from here? EDR and XDR remain a necessary component of a modern cybersecurity stack for their invaluable incident detection and forensics capabilities. They provide deep endpoint visibility by recording processes, memory, and network behaviors to identify and contain anomalies that slip past policy boundaries. Their insights are aggregated with telemetry from identity, cloud, email, and network sources to reveal coordinated attacks across an enterprise. Organizations cannot rely solely on detection. Prevention must be enforced through allowlisting controls to stop attacks before they can execute. Detection technologies must be combined with [application allowlisting](https://idemeum.com/allowlisting) to build a comprehensive security ecosystem. Together, the stack not only blocks untrusted actions before they can cause harm but also detects and correlates suspicious events, showing where administrators can add defenses or improve user behavior. Prevent attacks first, then fortify initial attack vectors through the visibility and forensics offered by EDR and XDR. At idemeum, we are dedicated to changing how [application control](https://idemeum.com/platform/endpoint-control) can stop malware. Our goal is to make allowlisting simple and leverage AI to reduce the friction and time spent on managing application control.