Threatpost has earned its position as one of the cybersecurity industry’s most trusted editorial outlets. Security operations teams, CISOs, vulnerability researchers, incident responders, and policy makers read it daily , not for product news, but for credible, fast-moving intelligence on threats, vulnerabilities, and the decisions that follow them. For security professionals, analysts, and vendors with genuine insight to share, a Threatpost byline carries real weight.
Getting there requires more than a good idea. Threatpost editors move fast, expect tight sourcing, and have no patience for pitches that read like press releases. This guide walks you through every step , from identifying the right story angle to formatting your draft, navigating the editorial process, and knowing when to bring in expert support. TheCconnects works directly with security professionals and communications teams to refine pitches, prepare publication-ready copy, and manage outreach to editors at Threatpost and comparable outlets.
- Understand the audience , Security practitioners, CISOs, researchers, and policy-makers who need evidence, not opinion.
- Choose a timely, evidence-backed angle , Original data, vulnerability analysis, or incident-derived lessons with a clear news hook.
- Draft a concise pitch , One paragraph plus a four to five point outline showing news value and sourcing plan.
- Match editorial tone and format , Concise, attributed, neutral in voice, and operationally actionable.
- Disclose affiliations upfront , Full conflict-of-interest disclosure is non-negotiable for editorial placement.
- Expect a rapid decision window , Most pitches receive a response within 48 hours to two weeks; be ready to edit quickly.
- Work with TheCconnects , We refine the pitch, prepare the article, and manage targeted editorial outreach on your behalf.
Know the Audience Before You Write a Word
Threatpost readers are not generalists. They are technical and strategic simultaneously , people who need to understand a vulnerability at the exploit level and communicate its business impact to a board by Friday. Your pitch must speak to both registers.
Editors prioritize content that delivers something readers cannot get from a vendor advisory or a press release. That means original telemetry, novel analysis, or operational guidance grounded in real-world response experience. A pitch that leads with a product’s capabilities will be declined. A pitch that leads with a threat actor’s technique, backed by sanitized indicators and a detection rule, will earn attention.
Before drafting your pitch, spend 60 minutes reading Threatpost’s current coverage. Identify the formats that appear most frequently , breaking vulnerability analysis, incident response retrospectives, policy explainers, practitioner how-to pieces. Note which authors recur and what their institutional affiliations are. Map the gaps your expertise can credibly fill.
What Threatpost editors consistently prioritize:
- Timeliness , new vulnerabilities, active campaigns, emerging policy developments
- Evidence , telemetry, indicators of compromise, primary research, or documented incident analysis
- Practicality , detection heuristics, mitigation playbooks, policy guidance
- Editorial independence , clear separation from vendor marketing, even when the author works for a vendor
Pick the Right Story: Three Formats That Work
Not every security idea fits Threatpost’s editorial model. The following three categories have the highest acceptance rate for contributor submissions.
Breaking or near-breaking vulnerability analysis. If you have early visibility into a disclosed CVE, an emerging exploit campaign, or a new attack technique , and can provide sanitized, non-destructive indicators alongside context , this is Threatpost’s highest-priority content type. Turnaround must be fast. Have your draft ready before or immediately after pitching.
Technical research and telemetry-backed trend analysis. Tool evaluations, exploit chain analysis, honeypot-derived findings, and behavioral trend data from production environments all qualify. Rigorous sourcing and responsible disclosure are mandatory. If your data involves customer environments, anonymization and representative sampling methodology must be described explicitly.
Practitioner-focused operational guidance. “How to detect X technique in Splunk,” “Lessons from a ransomware response in an OT environment,” “What the new NIS2 requirements mean for your SOC” , these perform well when anchored to a recent incident, regulation, or exploit wave. They must be tied to a timely hook, not presented as generic best practice.
If your idea is inherently evergreen , a vendor playbook, a high-level opinion piece , find the timely frame before pitching. What recent regulation, exploit wave, or industry event makes this relevant this week? Lead with that.
The Pitch: Structure, Tone, and What Editors Actually Read
Threatpost editors receive substantial pitch volume. Your initial contact must communicate news value, credibility, and editorial fit in under 200 words. Everything else is detail they will ask for if interested.
Pitch formula:
Subject line , Specific and evidence-forward: “Pitch: Telemetry shows 3x rise in unpatched OPC-UA exposures , detection + mitigation” is better than “Guest post submission , cybersecurity analysis.”
Opening paragraph (two sentences maximum): What is the story and why does it matter right now? Not background. Not context. The news value, stated directly.
Audience relevance (one sentence): Who specifically must act on this, and what does that action look like?
Outline (three to five bullets): Proposed subheadings with evidence sources noted , telemetry volume, advisory references, interview sources, detection artifacts.
Credentials (one sentence): Your role, the relevant experience, and two prior published bylines , ideally at recognized security or technology outlets.
Logistics: Indicate exclusivity, proposed word count, and whether you have figures, sanitized screenshots, or supplementary detection rules ready.
Example pitch opening:
I’d like to contribute a data-backed analysis documenting a threefold increase in exposed OPC-UA endpoints observed over Q3, explain the stale configuration patterns attackers are exploiting, and provide tested detection rules and mitigation playbooks for SOC teams. I can supply anonymized telemetry (n=1,200+ endpoints), sanitized packet-level indicators, and Splunk and Zeek detection queries.
Attach a 30–40 word author bio, a headshot, and two to three links to prior work. Keep the email under 250 words. Do not attach a full draft unless the guidelines explicitly request it.
Writing the Article: Structure, Sourcing, and Safety
Once a pitch is accepted, deliver a clean, tightly structured draft that requires minimal editorial rework. Responsiveness and draft quality at this stage significantly influence your relationship with the editorial team on future submissions.
Recommended article structure:
Headline: Informative and specific. Avoid marketing language, superlatives, and vendor product names in headlines. “New Exploit Chain Targets Unpatched OPC-UA Endpoints , Detection and Mitigation Guide” outperforms “Why Industrial Protocol Security Is Broken.”
Lead (30–50 words): What happened and why it matters. State the finding, not the background.
Context (one paragraph): Brief background for readers who need it. Do not make readers wade through context to reach the analysis.
Evidence and analysis (two to four short sections): Telemetry, sanitized screenshots, indicators of compromise, and behavioral analysis. Each section should have a distinct analytical point , not just data description.
Actionable guidance: Detection rules, mitigation steps, and tested playbook actions. This is the section Threatpost readers share with their teams. Make it immediately operational.
Closing: Short forward-looking observation and recommended next actions for security teams. Avoid promotional language in the closing.
Sourcing and safety requirements:
- Never publish exploit code, direct destructive instructions, or unsanitized indicators that could enable harm. If including proof-of-concept level detail, redact exploit mechanics and provide summary-level safe indicators only.
- Attribute all public advisories, vendor statements, and joint disclosures with direct links.
- When using proprietary telemetry, explicitly describe anonymization methodology and sampling approach. Threatpost editors will ask.
- Provide verification artifacts , hashes, sanitized PCAPs , only if the editor requests them and with explicit safety disclaimers attached.
Formatting, Length, and Citations
Length: 800–1,800 words covers most Threatpost formats. Breaking news analysis can be shorter. Research-backed explainers typically fall in the 1,200–1,500 word range. Your draft should fill the format it requires , no padding, no truncation.
Formatting:
- Short paragraphs , two to four sentences maximum
- Subheadings for each analytical section
- Bullets for detection steps, mitigation actions, and indicators
- Detection rules and code snippets in monospaced font
- One to two high-resolution figures with descriptive captions (sanitized screenshots, telemetry charts)
Citations: Include at minimum two to three links to authoritative public sources , CVE databases, vendor advisories, joint CISA/NCSC statements, peer-reviewed research. Avoid linking to your own employer’s content as a primary source unless the content is the original primary source material.
Timeline and Editorial Process
Initial pitch response: Most responses arrive within 48 hours to two weeks. If you have not heard back within seven to ten business days, one brief, professional follow-up referencing the original subject line is appropriate.
Editing rounds: Expect one or two editorial rounds focused on clarity, sourcing attribution, and headline precision. Respond to editorial feedback within 24 hours where possible , editorial queues move fast at active security publications, and delays push placement dates.
Fact-checking: Be ready to supply supporting sources for any specific claim or statistic. Threatpost will not publish unsubstantiated assertions, and editors may request additional verification before publication.
Post-acceptance: Confirm image rights, any exclusivity period, and whether the piece will appear in a specific editorial section. Clarify whether you want to be notified before publication for final review.
Ethics, Disclosures, and the Promotional Content Line
Conflict of interest disclosure: If your article mentions a product your employer makes, a client relationship, or any commercial interest related to the subject matter, disclose it in the author bio and in a transparency note within the piece. Threatpost editorial standards require this. Editors who discover undisclosed conflicts after publication will not work with that contributor again.
Sponsored and thought leadership content: If your primary goal is brand visibility rather than editorial contribution, use Threatpost’s commercial channels , sponsored content, white paper hosting, or advertising placements. Editorial submissions that are identified as disguised advertising are declined without exception. The distinction matters to editors, and it matters to the readers whose trust makes the publication valuable.
Vulnerability disclosure timing: If your article involves an unreported or partially reported vulnerability, follow responsible disclosure protocols before pitching. Confirm with the affected vendor whether a coordinated disclosure timeline is in place. Threatpost editors are familiar with these processes and will ask.
Ready-to-Use Pitch Templates
Template 1 , Technical Analysis Pitch
Subject: Pitch , [Specific hook: e.g., “Telemetry shows surge in exposed XCP endpoints , detection & mitigation”]
Hi [Editor Name],
I’m [Name], [title] at [organization]. I’d like to pitch a data-driven analysis showing [core finding] and provide detection and mitigation steps for security operations teams.
I can supply anonymized telemetry (n=[volume]), sanitized indicators, and detection rules for [Splunk/Zeek/ELK]. Proposed structure: 1) What we observed, 2) How attackers exploit it, 3) Detection and mitigation, 4) Recommended next actions.
Bio: [30–40 words]. Prior bylines: [Link 1] / [Link 2].
Available exclusively for Threatpost: [Yes/No]. Estimated word count: [X].
Thank you, [Name] | [Contact]
Template 2 , Practitioner How-To Pitch
Subject: Pitch , [Specific operational title: e.g., “Detecting lateral movement in OT environments , a SOC playbook”]
Hi [Editor Name],
Following [recent incident/regulation/advisory], I’d like to contribute a practitioner-focused guide on [topic]. The piece will provide tested detection logic, step-by-step response actions, and lessons from [incident type or production environment].
Sourcing: [primary data source, advisory references, interview source if applicable]. Proposed subheads: [list three to four concisely].
I’m [Name], [role], with previous bylines at [Publication 1] and [Publication 2]. Happy to provide a full draft within [X days] of acceptance.
[Name] | [Contact]
Template 3 , Polite Follow-Up (After 7–10 Business Days)
Subject: Following up , Pitch: [original subject line]
Hi [Editor Name],
I wanted to follow up briefly on the pitch I sent on [date] regarding [one-line hook]. The story remains timely and I have the draft ready. Happy to adjust the angle or format if there’s a better fit for your current editorial calendar.
Thank you for your time.
[Name] | [Contact]
Common Mistakes That Kill Pitches
Security publications receive far more pitches than they publish. These are the most consistent reasons credible contributors do not get placed:
Promotional framing in editorial packaging. The moment an editor reads a sentence that reads like a product data sheet, the pitch is finished. Even if the underlying analysis is sound, the framing disqualifies it.
Claims without evidence. Asserting that “attackers are increasingly targeting X” without telemetry, advisory citations, or documented incident data is not analysis , it is assertion. Editors will ask for evidence; have it ready before pitching.
No timely hook on evergreen content. A general best-practice guide, however well-written, needs a news peg , a recent exploit wave, a new regulation, an industry incident , to earn editorial priority over breaking coverage.
Unstructured drafts. Long paragraphs without subheadings, missing citations, and no clear flow signal that significant editorial work is required. Most busy editorial teams will pass in favor of a cleaner submission.
Ignoring disclosure requirements. Failing to disclose commercial affiliations , even inadvertently , damages editorial trust and can result in permanent exclusion from a publication’s contributor list.
Pitching without reading the publication. Submissions that propose topics already covered in depth, suggest formats the publication does not use, or demonstrate no familiarity with the editorial voice are declined on that basis alone.
Final Checklist Before You Submit
- Clear, timely hook that addresses Threatpost’s specific audience
- One-paragraph pitch with three to five bullet outline
- Credible sourcing plan , telemetry, advisories, primary interviews
- Full disclosure of any commercial or employer conflicts of interest
- Author bio (30–40 words), headshot, and two prior bylines
- Draft ready or timeline to deliver post-acceptance confirmed
- Figures or detection artifacts prepared and sanitized
- Follow-up plan if no response within seven to ten business days
- Responsible disclosure timing confirmed for any vulnerability content
- Promotional language removed from all sections of the draft
FAQ
Q1: Does Threatpost accept unsolicited guest post submissions?
A: Threatpost accepts contributor pitches from security researchers, practitioners, analysts, and qualified vendor representatives. Pitches must be evidence-backed, editorially independent, and tied to a timely news hook. Marketing-led submissions are declined. Check Threatpost’s current contributor contact information on their official site, as editorial contacts and submission processes may be updated periodically.
Q2: What topics are most likely to be accepted as a Threatpost guest post?
A: Threatpost prioritizes vulnerability analysis backed by original telemetry or indicators, incident response retrospectives with operational lessons, emerging threat actor technique analysis, and practitioner-focused detection and mitigation guides. Pieces tied to current exploit activity, active campaigns, or new regulatory developments receive the highest editorial priority.
Q3: How long does Threatpost take to respond to a pitch?
A: Response times typically range from 48 hours to two weeks depending on editorial queue and story timeliness. If your pitch is tied to a breaking or fast-moving story, indicate that clearly and expect faster turnaround. For evergreen analysis, one polite follow-up after seven to ten business days is appropriate if no response has been received.
Q4: Can vendors submit guest posts to Threatpost without it being considered promotional?
A: Yes, with full disclosure. Vendor-affiliated contributors can publish on Threatpost provided they disclose the affiliation explicitly, the content is editorially independent and evidence-based, and the piece does not mention the vendor’s products in a promotional context without clear journalistic justification. The editorial standard applies equally to all contributors regardless of employer.
Q5: How does TheCconnects help with Threatpost guest post placement?
A: TheCconnects refines your pitch, prepares a publication-ready draft aligned to Threatpost’s editorial standards, manages submission and follow-up outreach, and advises on responsible disclosure timing for vulnerability-related content. The service is available to security professionals, vendors, and communications teams seeking editorial placement at Threatpost and comparable security media outlets.
contact 📧 contact@thecconnects.com or call 📞 +91 91331 10730 or WhatsApp 💬 https://wa.me/919133110730
