First Reference company logo

Inside Internal Controls

News and discussion on implementing risk management

machine cogs image

cyber risk

Making intelligent and informed decisions around cyber

The experts continue to bombard us with their advice, insight, and guidance for addressing cyber.

 

, , , ,

New reports on the cost and incidence of cyber breaches

A cyber breach can affect an organization in many ways, from trivial to devastating. There is a range of potential effects, each with its own likelihood.

 

, , , , , , ,

The cyber heat map

Vince Dasta of Protiviti makes a good point (pun intended – as will be explained shortly) in Cyber Risk Assessment: Moving Past the “Heat Map Trap”.

 

, , ,

Stop managing and start taking risk

Success in business is taking the right level of the right risks. It all comes down to helping leaders make informed and intelligent decisions.

 

, , , , ,

People still don’t know how to assess cyber risk!

Why do the consultants keep advising management and the boards to consider cyber risk as if it is separate from all other business risks?

 

, , , , , ,

Who takes cyber risk?

Who is taking cyber risk? Is it the board and top management who are deciding how much scarce resource to invest in breach prevention, detection and response? Or is it the business leaders whose initiatives are damaged or worse should there be a security incident?

 

, ,

UK government guidance on risk and cyber: the very good and the very bad

The National Cyber Security Center (NCSC) is a part of the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). If you are like me, you may have only heard about GCHQ in an unflattering context, that of working with US intelligence agencies to spy on foreign heads of state and hack foreign agencies.

 

, ,

SEC investigates cyber-related frauds

On October 16th, the US Securities and Exchange Commission published Report of Investigation Pursuant to Section 21(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Regarding Certain Cyber-Related Frauds Perpetrated Against Public Companies and Related Internal Accounting Controls Requirements.

 

, , , , ,

Deloitte Internal Audit 3.0 has major flaws

Earlier this year, Deloitte published Internal Audit 3.0, The future of Internal Audit is now. It’s great that they are encouraging internal audit departments to change so they can meet modern demands, but their presentation that they are offering something novel and disruptive is way off the mark.

 

, , ,

New information about cyber risk is alarming

According to the 2018 Sentinel One Global Ransomware Report, it appears that the frequency of attacks are surprisingly high, but the extent of damage is surprisingly low.

 

, ,

So what if the risk is high?

Most organizations cannot afford to reduce every single risk to what some practitioners would deem acceptable. Providing actionable information about all the things that might happen, not by using terms like High, Medium, or Low, but in specific business terms will help evaluate which risks to take.

 

, , , , ,

Collaboration between the business risk and IT security teams

Take each of your business objectives and plans. Now, figure out what might result from a technology-related failure (noting that ‘technology’ extends beyond the IT function). Then, what are you going to do about it?

 

, , , , , ,

Cyber and reputation risk are dominoes

As I was reading the book, I realized that I have a problem with organizations placing separate attention to reputation risk and its management. It’s simply an element, which should not be overlooked, in how any organization manages risk – or, I should say, how it considers what might happen in its decision-making activities.

 

, , , , ,

How much cyber risk should an organization take?

I did a video with Joe McCafferty of MISTI last month. I am interested in whether you share my views. I also have some questions for you—after you watch the video.

 

, , , , , , , ,

Why do so many practitioners misunderstand risk?

My apologies in advance to all those who talk about third–party risk, IT risk, cyber risk, and so on. We don’t, or shouldn’t, address risk for its own sake. That’s what we are doing when we talk about these risk silos. We should address risk because of its potential effect on the achievement of enterprise objectives.

 

, , ,

Previous Posts