Cybersecurity has become a critical part of corporate governance, with board members increasingly held accountable for the digital safety of their organizations. Amid rising breach costs, new cybersecurity regulations like those from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and new studies finding widespread cybersecurity failures, the impact of board-level cyber governance decisions is significant.

Welcome folks! It’s 2024 and we here at Bitsight are kicking off a series of short informative posts on events that caught our attention as cognition authorities1 each month. We’re excited to report on the interesting things Bitsight found.

When it comes to managing hidden risk and shadow IT, our primary challenge as cybersecurity practitioners is securing the organization’s data and applications while empowering users to perform their duties efficiently. After all, one survey found that 67% of employees aren’t completely satisfied with their workplace tools and technologies—often resulting in the adoption of unsanctioned applications.

Cyber risk regulations like NIS2 and DORA in the EU, or PS21/3 in the UK, signal a seismic shift toward strengthening cyber resilience and enforcing accountability. Championing regulations is not just a matter of checking compliance boxes: it’s an opportunity to become a business leader. To enable growth and protect revenue.

In this article: If you're a security leader being asked to facilitate a cybersecurity audit, or if you are a member of the board requesting one, you must understand the difference between a cybersecurity audit and a cybersecurity assessment. Despite sounding the same, both provide you with different types of information - and that might have a significant impact on your organization’s security posture. In this blog, we provide a quick introduction to a cybersecurity audit vs.

In today's fast-paced business environment, the ever-evolving landscape of technology empowers employees with unprecedented flexibility and agility. While this fosters innovation and productivity, it also presents a lurking challenge—Shadow IT. This term encapsulates the use of unauthorized software, applications, or devices within an organization, posing substantial cybersecurity risks and operational hurdles.

If you’re a business executive or a risk leader, you’re likely familiar with “proxy season,” the time of year when public companies hold their annual general meetings. During these meetings, investors have the opportunity to vote on important issues such as the election of board members and executive compensation.

Third-party risk is everywhere and the cybersecurity posture of those third parties is more important now than ever before. With organizations using 130 SaaS solutions on average, onboarding the “wrong” vendor — one that doesn’t share the same cyber practices or hygiene as you do, or that sharing sensitive data with would be cause for concern — could land an organization in hot water.

The problem with shadow IT isn’t really the need for new tools, it’s the fact that people use them without IT security teams knowing. This usually happens because they perceive security policies as restrictive and antagonistic toward their productivity. In this way, Shadow IT is a process issue—not a software issue. Hidden risk is increasingly challenging cybersecurity leaders as digital supply chains grow and more apps are added to the network.

While security ratings are a great way to demonstrate that you’re paying attention to the standard cyber health of the organization, you also need to show that you’re adhering to industry and regulatory best practices for IT security and making informed decisions for the long-term. A cybersecurity framework can help.