Practice vs Process Maturity: Strengthening Your Cyber Compliance & Risk Program

Information security maturity has never been more important. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the catalyzation of digital transformation and the ripple effects on businesses ensuring a strong cyber security posture and risk management program is essential for the new year. Too often, organizations will turn to technology investments to help enhance their security, however, as technologies have become increasingly capable, we are seeing that there is no way to use technology to protect against human error. Regulations are beginning to reflect this realization; with the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) being a landmark standard that incorporates both process and practice maturity when gauging the maturity level of a Department of Defense contractor’s security program.

Accounting for People and Process as well as Technology

As we move into a new year, organizations are still working to support the new paradigm of work that the pandemic ushered in. Specifically, security and risk teams have been working to update policies and procedures to support the rapid rise of remote work (a trend on the horizon but much like other trends accelerated by the pandemic, something no one saw becoming reality this fast). Furthermore, as digital transformation has distributed risk decision-makers across the organization, security leaders have been forced to take a risk-based approach to their programs where historically compliance was a primary driver.

Practice vs Process Maturity

While we have seen standards like CMMC explicitly discuss the concepts of process and practice maturity, assessing and increasing the level of maturity on a practice and security process level is possible using frameworks such as the NIST CSF Implementation Tiers.

At its core, improving security maturity and transitioning from ad hoc/reactive security to proactive/optimizing security is the end goal. Regardless of the security maturity model an organization chooses to manage that maturity it is essential to understand where you stand.

Join CyberSaint Principal Solutions architect Steve Torino when he dives deeper into the value of assessing and analyzing process versus practice maturity in the upcoming webinar: Practice vs Process Maturity: Strengthening Your Cyber Compliance & Risk Program.

Information security maturity has never been more important. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the catalyzation of digital transformation and the ripple effects on businesses ensuring a strong cyber security posture and risk management program is essential for the new year. Too often, organizations will turn to technology investments to help enhance their security, however, as technologies have become increasingly capable, we are seeing that there is no way to use technology to protect against human error. Regulations are beginning to reflect this realization; with the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) being a landmark standard that incorporates both process and practice maturity when gauging the maturity level of a Department of Defense contractor’s security program.

Accounting for People and Process as well as Technology

As we move into a new year, organizations are still working to support the new paradigm of work that the pandemic ushered in. Specifically, security and risk teams have been working to update policies and procedures to support the rapid rise of remote work (a trend on the horizon but much like other trends accelerated by the pandemic, something no one saw becoming reality this fast). Furthermore, as digital transformation has distributed risk decision-makers across the organization, security leaders have been forced to take a risk-based approach to their programs where historically compliance was a primary driver.

Practice vs Process Maturity

While we have seen standards like CMMC explicitly discuss the concepts of process and practice maturity, assessing and increasing the level of maturity on a practice and security process level is possible using frameworks such as the NIST CSF Implementation Tiers.

At its core, improving security maturity and transitioning from ad hoc/reactive security to proactive/optimizing security is the end goal. Regardless of the security maturity model an organization chooses to manage that maturity it is essential to understand where you stand.

Join CyberSaint Principal Solutions architect Steve Torino when he dives deeper into the value of assessing and analyzing process versus practice maturity in the upcoming webinar: Practice vs Process Maturity: Strengthening Your Cyber Compliance & Risk Program.

*** This is a Security Bloggers Network syndicated blog from CyberSaint Blog authored by Ethan Bresnahan. Read the original post at: https://www.cybersaint.io/blog/information-security-maturity-process-vs-practice