In writing the FAIR-CAM™ white paper, I took a short detour from the complex landscape of cybersecurity to explain the new FAIR Controls Analytics Model™ with an analogy that almost anyone can relate to.
Jack Jones
Recent Posts
Introduced at the October, 2021, FAIR Conference, the FAIR Controls Analytics Model™ (FAIR-CAM™) will begin to have an impact in 2022. Although eventually it should benefit the risk management profession in many ways, both large and small, its effects are likely to be gradual as people and the industry as a whole begins to wrap their minds around its implications.
The Apache Log4j security vulnerability uncovered recently is every cybersecurity defender’s nightmare - a zero-day exploited in a practically ubiquitous software library. Because zero-day exploits aren’t going away anytime soon, it’s important for organizations to increase their resilience to this type of change in the risk landscape.
In my last blog post on qualitative risk measurement, I discussed three key aspects that often make the difference between good measurements and bad measurements — scope, model, and data. I also pointed out that these apply to both qualitative and quantitative risk measurement.
What makes for a high-quality qualitative risk measurement? The answer is simple. We just have to go back to the scope, model, and data elements
There are a lot of blog posts and conference presentations that discuss the differences between qualitative vs. quantitative risk analysis. Most of the time, those discussions focus on the challenges or perceived flaws in one or the other.
I’m thrilled with many of the provisions in the President’s recent Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity. The tiered software security ratings system, the IoT consumer labeling, the cybersecurity review board, and the emphasis on sharing information on breaches and other cyber incidents, are all bold initiatives
State legislatures in Nevada, Ohio, Utah and Connecticut have passed or are in the process of passing “safe harbor” protection against negligence lawsuits for companies hit with a data breach – if the companies implement controls from a recognized cybersecurity framework.
One of the questions I like to ask CISO’s is, “What is the most cost-effective control in your arsenal?” The responses are varied and interesting, but their answers are pretty consistently based on bias
Once again, after a run of high profile breaches,
I’ve begun to hear cries that “leadership didn’t sufficiently support” an organization’s cybersecurity program. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it.
