Cyber Resilience Starts With Visibility: How Risk Quantification is Imperative to Improving Security Posture

It’s often easy to put cybersecurity practices in a box that is essentially “out of sight, out of mind” until there is a data breach and the C-suite are scrambling and asking “why?” or, more importantly, “how”? For modern, forward-thinking companies, it’s no longer enough just to use a risk matrix and hope for the best.

Quantifying risk can be a mystical process, especially when discussing black-box reporting. Many risk quantification solutions available today are, by all intents and purposes, black-box solutions that ingest risk data and return metrics specific to the solution with little to no explanation as to how those metrics came about. When looking at “glass-box” vs. black-box in cybersecurity, we’re talking about the theory of transparent risk quantification vs. shielded risk quantification.

Where black-box solutions rely on proprietary methodologies and unvetted practices to deliver sources of risks, “glass-box” solutions empower security leaders to employ industry-leading, gold-standard methodologies, and frameworks that can be easily explained to both technical and business-side stakeholders.

It’s impossible to approach risk quantification with a one size fits all approach. There are too many variables and standards to adhere to to make a broad, sweeping statement that says, “this only way you can avoid risk events.” Instead, CISOs should focus on how “glass-box” solutions can increase a security leader’s confidence level to give them faster insights, leading to smarter decisions and meaningful action in a crisis. 

Risk Focused Thinking 

Quantifying risk is a relatively new practice. While the need for concrete cyber risk quantification has emerged, the landscape of risk assessment frameworks to quantify risk are still fragmented. Cyber risk quantification is often viewed as an impractical process that is ambitious but, overall, relatively futile given the novelty of the concept. The return on security investment (ROSI) is challenging to measure, and the results are challenging to condense into a business-friendly context. 

This approach has pushed CISO’s to favor a qualitative approach to risk evaluation. As demand for digital transformation grows, CISOs are under more pressure than ever before to effectively communicate risk to a broad audience, including C-suite executives and company employees.

To frame cybersecurity practices in a business context, especially initially, security leaders must tell a story to illustrate how to build a security culture that orbits around business objectives instead of nebulous controls that are mandated by specific sectors of a government or regulatory body.

For example, when looking at software that can supplement current IT GRC systems, solutions that involve artificial intelligence (AI) or natural language processing (NLP) can save companies countless person-hours by utilizing automation to approach risk and compliance. Executive leadership may not be immediately invested in how NLP can assist day-to-day operations. However, by demonstrating how automation increases resilience and underlining what an asset it could be to leverage real-time risk intelligence, you can create a narrative around risk and compliance that portrays an investment that will give the organization returns, instead of an undefinable “black-box” method that shows little return and little results.

The CyberStrong platform uses NLP to dynamically map control data across frameworks and standards without requiring an analyst or team to crosswalk manually. This allows highly regulated organizations to achieve continuous compliance with an approach that goes far beyond industry standard mappings.

In fact, according to Gartner, by 2023, 25% of extra-large global enterprises will have adopted process automation for risk control testing and monitoring, which is an increase from fewer than 5% today. Gartner goes on to further predict that by 2025, 30% of compliance management technology capabilities will have machine learning and natural language processing to interpret legislation and suggest relevant regulatory controls, which is an increase from fewer than 10% today.

Being Resilient 

When addressing resilience, it’s vital to focus on long-term goals instead of short-term benefits. To make sure your cybersecurity practices endure, it’s necessary to make deliberate efforts into what Gartner calls the five organizational layers—leadership, culture, people, processes, and infrastructure. Resilience in this context should resist, absorb, recover, and adapt to business disruptions.

In short, leadership must be willing to invest in cybersecurity initiatives that are agile and adaptable instead of relying on dated legacy systems that struggle to grow with their companies. Leadership is also instrumental in implementing a culture in the company the prioritizes mitigating threats and vulnerabilities so the people who work in the organization can practice safe data security and etc. Processes and infrastructure are key here as well, as a process that only assesses once a year or once every other year will always be playing catch up on risk quantification and management. Infrastructure is required to achieve custom risk quantification methodologies to track, analyze, and communicate risk profiles to ensure a standardized, unified, and aligned strategy around risk.

To truly thrive in a digital age, organizations must infuse resilience into daily operations, or they risk leaving themselves wide open to threats and possibly losing stakeholder and customer support. Risk quantification isn’t going to disappear, in fact, as more industries convert their existing systems into digital spaces, risk quantification will be necessary to survive in the new normal of the digital age. Even qualitative risk assessments are better than no assessments at all.  

Improving Security Posture 

Improving security posture through resilience isn’t going to happen overnight. Instead, company’s should strive to slowly incorporate more precise risk assessments and by making sure their quantitative risk analysis method follows glass box standards instead of black box standards. Security leaders should always be able to have the answers for the method in which they quantify risk. Data should drive decision-making, and without the data, the decisions may not hold up in a boardroom.

Making sure your security strategy is flexible is paramount. Rigid systems make frameworks less secure instead of more secure. Security leaders also need to periodically assess how their systems collect and analyze risk to ensure their risk quantification process stays agile and adaptable. By doing this, organizations can employ effective risk management strategies.

Conclusion 

Transparent risk quantification methods enable all stakeholders and executives greater insight and visibility into any cybersecurity program and give CISO’s the tools and techniques to be successful. To learn more about how continuous control automation can improve your security posture, contact us

It’s often easy to put cybersecurity practices in a box that is essentially “out of sight, out of mind” until there is a data breach and the C-suite are scrambling and asking “why?” or, more importantly, “how”? For modern, forward-thinking companies, it’s no longer enough just to use a risk matrix and hope for the best.

Quantifying risk can be a mystical process, especially when discussing black-box reporting. Many risk quantification solutions available today are, by all intents and purposes, black-box solutions that ingest risk data and return metrics specific to the solution with little to no explanation as to how those metrics came about. When looking at “glass-box” vs. black-box in cybersecurity, we’re talking about the theory of transparent risk quantification vs. shielded risk quantification.

Where black-box solutions rely on proprietary methodologies and unvetted practices to deliver sources of risks, “glass-box” solutions empower security leaders to employ industry-leading, gold-standard methodologies, and frameworks that can be easily explained to both technical and business-side stakeholders.

It’s impossible to approach risk quantification with a one size fits all approach. There are too many variables and standards to adhere to to make a broad, sweeping statement that says, “this only way you can avoid risk events.” Instead, CISOs should focus on how “glass-box” solutions can increase a security leader’s confidence level to give them faster insights, leading to smarter decisions and meaningful action in a crisis. 

Risk Focused Thinking 

Quantifying risk is a relatively new practice. While the need for concrete cyber risk quantification has emerged, the landscape of risk assessment frameworks to quantify risk are still fragmented. Cyber risk quantification is often viewed as an impractical process that is ambitious but, overall, relatively futile given the novelty of the concept. The return on security investment (ROSI) is challenging to measure, and the results are challenging to condense into a business-friendly context. 

This approach has pushed CISO’s to favor a qualitative approach to risk evaluation. As demand for digital transformation grows, CISOs are under more pressure than ever before to effectively communicate risk to a broad audience, including C-suite executives and company employees.

To frame cybersecurity practices in a business context, especially initially, security leaders must tell a story to illustrate how to build a security culture that orbits around business objectives instead of nebulous controls that are mandated by specific sectors of a government or regulatory body.

For example, when looking at software that can supplement current IT GRC systems, solutions that involve artificial intelligence (AI) or natural language processing (NLP) can save companies countless person-hours by utilizing automation to approach risk and compliance. Executive leadership may not be immediately invested in how NLP can assist day-to-day operations. However, by demonstrating how automation increases resilience and underlining what an asset it could be to leverage real-time risk intelligence, you can create a narrative around risk and compliance that portrays an investment that will give the organization returns, instead of an undefinable “black-box” method that shows little return and little results.

The CyberStrong platform uses NLP to dynamically map control data across frameworks and standards without requiring an analyst or team to crosswalk manually. This allows highly regulated organizations to achieve continuous compliance with an approach that goes far beyond industry standard mappings.

In fact, according to Gartner, by 2023, 25% of extra-large global enterprises will have adopted process automation for risk control testing and monitoring, which is an increase from fewer than 5% today. Gartner goes on to further predict that by 2025, 30% of compliance management technology capabilities will have machine learning and natural language processing to interpret legislation and suggest relevant regulatory controls, which is an increase from fewer than 10% today.

Being Resilient 

When addressing resilience, it’s vital to focus on long-term goals instead of short-term benefits. To make sure your cybersecurity practices endure, it’s necessary to make deliberate efforts into what Gartner calls the five organizational layers—leadership, culture, people, processes, and infrastructure. Resilience in this context should resist, absorb, recover, and adapt to business disruptions.

In short, leadership must be willing to invest in cybersecurity initiatives that are agile and adaptable instead of relying on dated legacy systems that struggle to grow with their companies. Leadership is also instrumental in implementing a culture in the company the prioritizes mitigating threats and vulnerabilities so the people who work in the organization can practice safe data security and etc. Processes and infrastructure are key here as well, as a process that only assesses once a year or once every other year will always be playing catch up on risk quantification and management. Infrastructure is required to achieve custom risk quantification methodologies to track, analyze, and communicate risk profiles to ensure a standardized, unified, and aligned strategy around risk.

To truly thrive in a digital age, organizations must infuse resilience into daily operations, or they risk leaving themselves wide open to threats and possibly losing stakeholder and customer support. Risk quantification isn’t going to disappear, in fact, as more industries convert their existing systems into digital spaces, risk quantification will be necessary to survive in the new normal of the digital age. Even qualitative risk assessments are better than no assessments at all.  

Improving Security Posture 

Improving security posture through resilience isn’t going to happen overnight. Instead, company’s should strive to slowly incorporate more precise risk assessments and by making sure their quantitative risk analysis method follows glass box standards instead of black box standards. Security leaders should always be able to have the answers for the method in which they quantify risk. Data should drive decision-making, and without the data, the decisions may not hold up in a boardroom.

Making sure your security strategy is flexible is paramount. Rigid systems make frameworks less secure instead of more secure. Security leaders also need to periodically assess how their systems collect and analyze risk to ensure their risk quantification process stays agile and adaptable. By doing this, organizations can employ effective risk management strategies.

Conclusion 

Transparent risk quantification methods enable all stakeholders and executives greater insight and visibility into any cybersecurity program and give CISO’s the tools and techniques to be successful. To learn more about how continuous control automation can improve your security posture, contact us

*** This is a Security Bloggers Network syndicated blog from CyberSaint Blog authored by Kyndall Elliott. Read the original post at: https://www.cybersaint.io/blog/risk-quantification-methods