Most cybersecurity programs don’t fail because they lack controls. They fail because they fail to learn . Incidents happen. Audits surface gaps. Assessments reveal weaknesses. Yet many organizations treat these moments as interruptions instead of inputs . That is exactly why Improvement (ID.IM) exists in the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 Identify function. ID.IM ensures the organization systematically learns from experience and uses that learning to strengthen governance, risk management, and strategic execution. In CSF 2.0, improvement is no longer implied—it is explicit, measurable, and expected . This post covers: What ID.IM is in NIST CSF 2.0 How mature organizations operationalize continuous improvement Metrics that demonstrate learning, not just activity What Is NIST CSF 2.0 Improvement (ID.IM)? ID.IM focuses on identifying opportunities for improvement in cybersecurity governance, risk management, and controls based on: Incidents and near misses Risk assessments Aud...

If Asset Management answers “What do we have?” , Risk Assessment answers the more important question: “What could realistically go wrong, and what actually matters?” In NIST CSF 2.0, Risk Assessment (ID.RA) is no longer a compliance checkbox or an annual spreadsheet exercise. It is positioned as a living, decision-support capability that informs governance, investment prioritization, and executive accountability. Most organizations do risk assessments. Very few organizations use them effectively . This post explains: What ID.RA is in NIST CSF 2.0 How to implement it in a way executives trust Metrics that demonstrate risk maturity—not paperwork completion What Is NIST CSF 2.0 Risk Assessment (ID.RA)? ID.RA focuses on identifying and evaluating cybersecurity risk to organizational operations, assets, individuals, and stakeholders . In CSF 2.0, Risk Assessment explicitly includes: Threats (internal, external, supply chain, systemic) Vulnerabilities (technical, process, human) Likelih...

If you ask most CISOs where breaches really start, the answer is rarely “lack of tools.” It’s almost always lack of clarity . You cannot protect what you do not know exists. That is why Asset Management (ID.AM) sits at the foundation of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 Identify function. Every control, risk decision, investment, and response capability depends on accurate, current, and business-aligned asset visibility. In NIST CSF 2.0, Asset Management is no longer treated as an inventory exercise—it is framed as a risk-enabling capability that supports governance, threat modeling, resilience, and mission outcomes. This post breaks down: What ID.AM actually is in CSF 2.0 How to implement it pragmatically in a real enterprise Metrics CISOs and boards can use to measure effectiveness (not just activity) What Is NIST CSF 2.0 Asset Management (ID.AM)? ID.AM ensures that organizational assets—physical, digital, cloud-based, third-party, and data-centric—are identified, mana...

Cybersecurity has permanently moved out of the data center and into the boardroom. Regulators, customers, and investors now expect senior leadership to understand, oversee, and deliberately manage cyber risk . The NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 reflects this reality by elevating GOVERN to a first-class function—placing leadership accountability at the center of cybersecurity. This post ties together the full GOVERN function , explaining what boards and executives need to know—and what questions they should be asking. Why GOVERN Exists The GOVERN function addresses a fundamental challenge: Cybersecurity failures are rarely caused by missing tools. They are caused by unclear ownership, misaligned priorities, and unmanaged risk decisions. GOVERN ensures cybersecurity is treated as: An enterprise risk issue A leadership responsibility A business decision , not just a technical one When GOVERN is strong, organizations make fewer surprises and better tradeoffs. When it is weak, executives...

This week’s security landscape is marked by multiple zero-day vulnerabilities, sophisticated identity attacks, and the growing abuse of AI in cyber operations. CISOs should focus on rapid patching, monitoring for credential theft, and preparing for advanced threat scenarios. Below are the top items requiring executive attention, followed by a concise action checklist. Top Items CISOs Should Care About (Priority) Apple Fixes Exploited Zero-Day Affecting iOS, macOS, and Apple Devices What happened: Apple released urgent patches for a zero-day vulnerability actively exploited in the wild, impacting iOS, macOS, and other Apple devices. Why it matters: Exploited zero-days in widely used devices pose significant threat and regulatory risk. What to verify internally: Confirm all Apple devices are updated to the latest OS versions. Review device management policies for timely patch deployment. Assess exposure of high-value users and executives. ...

Cybersecurity governance does not stop at your network perimeter. Modern enterprises rely on a complex ecosystem of vendors, cloud providers, SaaS platforms, integrators, and partners. Each dependency introduces risk—often outside the direct control of the CISO. GV.SC (Supply Chain Risk Management) exists to ensure those risks are governed with the same rigor as internal cybersecurity controls. In NIST CSF 2.0, GV.SC formalizes how organizations identify, assess, manage, and oversee cybersecurity risk originating from suppliers and third parties . What GV.SC Is Designed to Address GV.SC focuses on governing risks that arise from: Third-party service providers Software supply chains and dependencies Cloud and managed service providers Strategic business partners Mergers, acquisitions, and outsourcing While technical controls may reduce exposure, governance ensures that supply chain risk is understood, accepted, mitigated, or avoided at the leadership level . Why Supply Chain Risk Is a ...