Dinesh O Bareja

𝓘𝓷 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓵𝓶 𝓸𝓯 𝓬𝔂𝓫𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓮𝓬𝓾𝓻𝓲𝓽𝔂, 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓢𝓮𝓬𝓾𝓻𝓲𝓽𝔂 𝓞𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓼 𝓒𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻 (𝓢𝓞𝓒) 𝓲𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓼𝓪𝓫𝓵𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓻 𝓮𝓯𝓯𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓹𝓾𝓽𝓮𝓻 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓼. 𝓗𝓮𝓻𝓮’𝓼 𝔀𝓱𝔂: 1. 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐃𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 & 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞: SOC teams are on the frontlines, identifying and mitigating cyber threats in real-time. 2. 𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: They ensure that digital evidence is meticulously collected and preserved for forensic analysis. 3. 𝐃𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐬: SOC analysts scrutinize the evidence to understand the nature and impact of incidents. 4. 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 Detailed forensic reports from the SOC provide valuable insights for strengthening security measures. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘖𝘊 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘺𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴.🛡️💻 #CyberSecurity #Forensics #SOC #IncidentResponse #DigitalSecurity #CyberDefense #ITSecurity #DataProtection #DigitalSafety #DigitalForensics #CyberAwareness #TechSecurity

17

𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬: Understanding Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM),Key Components of CTEM Program,The Five Stages of CTEM,Benefit of implementing CTEM program,Why do Organizations Need CTEM, CISO evaluation criteria choosing tools related to CTEM,Best Practices for the CTEM program The Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) program plays a vital role in helping organizations stay ahead of potential security threats by continuously identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks. By implementing CTEM, businesses are able to continually monitor their systems, networks, and assets, enabling them to promptly detect and respond to any emerging cyber threats. This proactive approach to threat management is essential for maintaining a robust security posture and safeguarding against potential security breaches. An Article by Praveen Singh , An Infographics by Netpoleon India , Techtalk Seres-An initiative by Mohan Kumar T L #ciso #cybersecurity #technology #learning

114

16 Comments

I've seen many a QSA-issued certificate of compliance proudly displayed, alongside an entity's other industry-certificates. Whereas, displaying their AOC would not be suitable or appropriate. Consequently, I would argue that there is a place for both types of documents but that they have their specific uses and must NOT be confused. Any QSAC that issues a PCI DSS certificate of compliance has a responsibility to ensure that the receiving entities understand the different uses so that they do not confuse the attestation of compliance (official document) with the certificate of compliance (unofficial document). #pcidssv4 #pcidss #pcicompliance

4

🔍 Unveiling NIST CSF v2.0 Audit Checklist - Part 5: Respond (RS) & Recover (RC) 🔍 Before you scroll down Follow Niranjan V for more such Infosec Content. Reach out for ISO 27001 Mentorship, Training, and Guidance, & join our exclusive infosec group for early access to creative infosec content PS: Infosec Community Link shared in Comments Section 1️⃣ Introduction to the Document: Delve into the final stages of the NIST CSF v2.0 framework with our latest checklist, focused on the crucial Respond (RS) and Recover (RC) functions. 2️⃣ What's in the Document: This part of the checklist offers detailed guidance on how to effectively manage and recover from cybersecurity incidents. It includes actionable steps, best practices, and key metrics to ensure your organization’s swift response and recovery. 3️⃣ Conclusion: Enhance your audit preparedness and resilience with this comprehensive guide. Download now to ensure your organization is ready to respond and recover from any security challenge. #NIST #NISTCSF #Respond #Recover #audit #checklist #infosec #cybersecurity #Governance #Risk #Compliance #incident #management #SOC #Disaster #recovery #Guidance #document #free

255

21 Comments

How detailed should the ISO 27001 documents be?  Criteria for deciding on the level of detail #ISO27001, #ISO27001Training, #InformationSecurity, #CyberSecurityTraining, #ISOCompliance, #InformationSecurityManagement, #ISMS, #DataProtection, #CyberSecurity, #ComplianceTraining, #SecurityAwareness, #RiskManagement, #ISOStandards, #SecurityTraining, #InfoSec, #ISO27001Certification, #Compliance, #GovernanceRiskCompliance, #InformationSecurityTraining

19

1 Comment

This Risk Management mind map outlines the key components of risk management in information security. Before you scroll down, don't forget to comment your love or follow Ministry of Security for more such creative infosec content. Here's a brief explanation of each main branch: 1️⃣ Risk Identification: Asset Inventory: Identifying and cataloging all valuable assets. Threat Analysis: Identifying potential threats to these assets. Vulnerability Assessment: Determining weaknesses in the system. 2️⃣ Risk Assessment: Likelihood Evaluation: Estimating the probability of a risk occurring. Impact Analysis: Determining the potential consequences of a risk. Risk Prioritization: Ranking risks based on their likelihood and impact. 3️⃣ Risk Mitigation: Risk Acceptance: Acknowledging and accepting certain risks. Risk Avoidance: Eliminating the risk by avoiding the activity. Risk Transfer: Shifting the risk to another party (e.g., insurance). Risk Reduction: Implementing controls to minimize the risk. 4️⃣ Risk Monitoring: Continuous Monitoring: Ongoing surveillance of the risk landscape. Incident Reporting: Documenting and analyzing security incidents. Key Risk Indicators: Metrics used to measure risk levels. Risk Reassessment: Periodically re-evaluating risks and controls.

219

15 Comments

What is the completion date for PCI DSS assessments documented in a Report on Compliance and its related Attestations of Compliance? In PCI DSS assessments documented in a Report on Compliance (ROC), the "Date of Report" is considered the completion date, marking when the QSA Company and assessed entity agree on the final version of the ROC. This date can be found in Section 1.2 of the ROC and on the cover page and in Section 3 of the ROC Attestations of Compliance (AOCs). The AOC includes a Merchant (or Service Provider) Attestation and a Qualified Security Assessor (QSA) Acknowledgement, both requiring signatures within a reasonable timeframe (typically two to three weeks) of the Date of Report. These signatures confirm the ROC's accuracy but do not indicate the actual completion date of the assessment. Any questions about these dates should be directed to the relevant submitting entity, such as an acquirer or payment brands. https://lnkd.in/gQ_yKQkX

11

𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬: 𝐍𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐲𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲💻🛡️🔍 A Complete Guide of "𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 " [ PDF Guide] 𝐆𝐞𝐭 𝐏𝐃𝐅 𝐓𝐨 𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐞 @ https://lnkd.in/dK5aznXU The growth of the managed security services is driven by the growing adoption of managed security services in the BFSI sector, rising cybercrimes and ransomware attacks, the rising trend of BYOD (bring your own device) in enterprises, and government initiatives aimed at encouraging the adoption of managed security services. However, the lack of trust among enterprises in giving full control of their system architecture to third-party service providers restrains the growth of the managed security services. The rising demand for advanced cybersecurity measures and the increasing adoption of cloud-based solutions among SMEs are expected to create growth opportunities in the market. However, one of the major challenges for the players operating in this market is the lack of awareness and misconceptions regarding managed security services among potential customers. ◙ 𝐁𝐲 𝐓𝐲𝐩𝐞: ➤Managed Identity & Access Management          ➤Managed Security Information & Event Management   ➤Managed Firewall    ➤Other Service Types ◙ 𝐁𝐲 𝐎𝐫𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐢𝐳𝐞: ➤Large Enterprises ➤Small & Medium-sized Enterprises ◙ 𝐁𝐲 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫: ➤BFSI ➤IT & Telecommunications ➤Manufacturing ➤Healthcare ➤Other Sectors ◙ 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐭𝐬 : ➤Threat monitoring ➤Proactive incident response ➤Enhanced compliance adherence ➤Cost-effective scalability ➤Expert cybersecurity professionals 🔑𝐊𝐞𝐲𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬: IBM Corporation (U.S.), Secureworks, Inc. (U.S.), AT&T Inc. (U.S.), NTT Corporation (Japan), Trustwave Holdings, Inc. (U.S.), Atos SE (France), CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (U.S.), Lumen Technologies (U.S.), F5, Inc. (U.S.), Fortinet, Inc. (U.S.), Kroll, LLC. (U.S.), CIPHER SECURITY LLC (U.S.), Nettitude Limited (U.S.), Ascend Technologies, LLC (U.S.), and Avertium, LLC (U.S.). #ManagedSecurityServices #CyberDefense #InfoSec #SecuritySolutions #ThreatDetection #DataProtection #CyberSecurity #ManagedServices #NetworkSecurity #IncidentResponse #CyberThreats #SecurityOperations #ITSecurity #RiskManagement #DigitalSecurity #CyberGuardians #SecurityExperts #EndpointProtection #SecurityAwareness #BusinessContinuity

1

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) - National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence (NCCoE)) released for public comment (open until Sept. 3): “Implementing a Zero Trust Architecture (NIST SP 1800-35 v.4)” This guide outlines #bestpractices for the implementation of #zerotrust architectures (ZTAs) to assist organizations with implementing a plan to gradually evolve their existing environments and technologies to #ZTAs over time. Further, the guide recommends that organizations wanting to deploy and implement #ZT embark on a journey that includes the following steps: - Discover and inventory the existing environment; - Formulate access policy to support the mission and business use cases; - Identify existing #security capabilities and technology; - Eliminate gaps in ZT policy and processes by applying a risk-based approach based on the value of #data; - Implement #ZTA components (people, process, and technology) and incrementally leverage deployed security solutions; - Verify the implementation to support ZT outcomes; - Continuously improve and evolve due to changes in threat landscape, mission, technology, and regulations. By following the guide, organizations should be better positioned to implement a ZTA that: - Supports user access to resources regardless of user location or device (managed or unmanaged); - Protects sensitive #information and other business assets and processes regardless of their location (on-premises or #cloud-based); -Limits #breaches by making it harder for attackers to move through an environment and by addressing insider #threats; - Performs continuous, real-time monitoring, logging, and #risk-based assessment and enforcement of corporate policy.

6

⚠️ Addressing Pushback Against ISO42001: A Case for Responsible AI Governance⚠️ Organizations considering #ISO42001, the Artificial Intelligence Management System (#AIMS) standard, often raise concerns about its feasibility or necessity. While these points of pushback may seem valid at first glance, they often reflect misconceptions about the value and flexibility of the standard, and #MSS in general. While I realize market (US) and regulatory (EU) pressure will always be your biggest influences, you need to know that there are many other business reasons to build/certify your AIMS. 🧱 Pushback 1: "ISO 42001 is too resource intensive." Implementing an AIMS might seem daunting, especially for smaller organizations with limited budgets or staffing. ➡️ Reality: 🔸Scalable Framework: ISO42001 is designed to be adaptable, meaning organizations can implement it incrementally, focusing first on areas with the greatest impact. 🔸Cost Avoidance: The resources invested in building a governance framework pale in comparison to the costs of regulatory penalties, lawsuits, or reputational damage caused by mismanaged AI systems. 🔸Long-Term Savings: By embedding lifecycle monitoring and risk management early, organizations reduce the likelihood of costly retrofitting or damage control later. 🧱 Pushback 2: "We don’t need ISO 42001; we already comply with other regulations." Some organizations believe existing regulatory compliance efforts (e.g., #GDPR, #NIS2, #DORA) make additional standards unnecessary. ➡️Reality: 🔸Holistic Governance: ISO42001 doesn’t duplicate existing efforts, it complements them by creating a unified framework that aligns diverse compliance requirements, streamlining implementation. 🔸Futureproofing: Regulations vary by region and evolve rapidly. ISO42001 positions organizations to adapt to new requirements rather than reacting shortsightedly. 🔸Beyond Compliance: ISO42001 focuses on building trust, transparency, and resilience in AI systems, which extends well beyond meeting regulatory minimums. 🧱 Pushback 3: "It will slow down our innovation." Organizations worry that implementing ISO42001 will introduce bureaucratic hurdles, hampering agility in AI development. ➡️Reality: 🔸Innovation Enabler: ISO42001 embeds structured risk management and lifecycle monitoring, reducing the likelihood of disruptions caused by unanticipated risks or ethical oversights. 🔸Trust as a Catalyst: Adopting ISO 42001 fosters trust among stakeholders, including customers, partners, and regulators, creating a competitive edge that accelerates adoption of AI solutions. 🔸Flexibility and Scalability: The standard is adaptable to various organizational sizes and AI maturity levels, enabling rapid alignment with innovation goals without stifling creativity. I welcome your perspective and feedback…please share any opinions you think might help our community. A-LIGN Shea Brown Kim Lucy Tom McNamara Kevin Schawinski Walter Haydock #TheBusinessofCompliance

102

9 Comments

BY LEVERAGING PSYCHO.LOGICAL TRICKS, ATTACKERS CONVINCE USERS TO MAKE SECURITY MISTAKES OR DISCLOSE SENSITIVE INFORMATION. . . . . . . . #CyberSecurity #InformationSecurity #DataSecurity #CyberRiskManagement #CyberResilience #DigitalTransformation #CyberThreatIntelligence #CyberAwareness #CyberDefense #DataProtection #ZeroTrust #ThreatDetection #NetworkSecurity #CloudSecurity #RiskManagement #SecurityOperations #EthicalHacking

2

THE RISK OF HEAT MAPS: How They Lead to False Security in Cyber Risk Management Heat maps, often used to visualize risk assessments in various shades of color, are popular in risk management. They offer a seemingly simple way to display risk levels and are used by executives and decision-makers as a quick overview tool. However, the convenience they offer often comes at the cost of depth and accuracy, leading to potentially misguided decision-making. In this article, published recently in the eGUIDE, Tobias Faiss explores 13 ways heat maps can do more harm than good in risk management. Come to the HUB to access Tobias' article in Vol 700 of the Continuity eGUIDE >> https://lnkd.in/ekg3wHNq Other practical resources and news in Vol 700 >> · Good Practices on Disaster Resilient Infrastructure · Let’s Do Great Things Together in 2025! · BCI Horizon Scan Report 2024  · Organizational Vulnerabilities due to 3rd-party Failures · Awards Winners at the 72nd IAEM Annual Conference Visit the Risk and Resilience HUB to connect, collaborate and build resilient organizations. https://lnkd.in/e4BVs58 #supplychainvulnerabilities, #heatmaps, #cyberriskmanagement, #risksin2025, #collaboration

7

1 Comment

Today I will share some points related to the Pyramid of Pain framework. The SOC analyst and Incident responder need to understand this framework for those willing to become SOC analysts. The Pain of the Pyramid is a basic concept that is used to categorize the Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures which is used against adversaries(attackers) so that they can spend their time, and money and it will become difficult to change by the adversary. There are some levels in the Pyramid of Pain which I describe shortly below Wait here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Before getting a deep dive into levels we must understand why we are doing this as a SOC Analyst by doing this we can gain deeper views about the compromised system. I hope you can understand all the above and let's move on to the levels of this framework. 1. Hash Values: There are many kinds of hashes some of them are MD5, SHA-1, and SHA-2 hashes algorithms. Every file has its hashes so that we can identify them. Analysts used this technique to identify malicious files by the hashes on the Internet such as VirusTotal websites. 2. IP addresses: Attackers used different types of IP addresses to maintain their persistence in the compromised systems. SOC Analyst will have to gather the information about the IP address and block it from accessing the system. It can get these details by using network tools like Wireshark. 3. Host/Network Artifacts: Host/Network artifacts are the remaining ones left by the attackers after exploiting the system such as registry values, suspicious process execution, and malicious files. Network artifacts are the indicators that are left by the attackers in the network and are caught by the SOC analyst by capturing the pcap files. Note: If the adversary is caught a this point then attackers have to change its tools and methodologies. 4. Tools: Let's talk about the tools there are many tools that are against attackers such as YARA, detection rules, and Antivirus signatures. We can get YARA results from Malware Bazaar and MalShare websites. We can also perform fuzzing hashes for similarity purposes. 5. TTP's: TTPs are Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures that can be used by the attacker to achieve its goal, which starts from phishing attacks to data exfiltration. Next time I will share about the Unified Kill chain.

17

30 Ways to Make Money in Cybersecurity 1. Cybersecurity Consulting 2.    Penetration Testing 3.    Vulnerability Assessment 4.    Security Auditing 5.    Incident Response Services 6.    Security Training 7.    Cybersecurity Software Development 8.    Managed Security Services 9.    Cybersecurity Research 10. Security Awareness Programs 11. Cyber Insurance 12. Security Product Reselling 13. Forensic Analysis 14. Bug Bounty Hunting 15. Security Architecture Design 16. Cryptocurrency Security Services 17. Security Compliance Services 18. Identity and Access Management (IAM) 19. Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 20. Cybersecurity Training Platforms 21. Security Operations Center (SOC) Services 22. Mobile Application Security Testing 23. Cloud Security Services 24. Industrial Control System (ICS) Security 25. Secure Software Development 26. Cybersecurity Blogging/Content Creation 27. Data Privacy Consulting 28. Cybersecurity Recruitment Services 29. Cybersecurity Incident Simulation Exercises 30. Cybersecurity Product Reviews #cybersecurity #CyberSecurityAwareness #DigitalTransformation

7

𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗠𝘆𝘁𝗵𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗜𝗦𝗢 𝟮𝟳𝟬𝟬𝟯 𝗛𝗲𝗹𝗽𝘀 𝗗𝗲𝗯𝘂𝗻𝗸 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗺 ISO 27003 provides guidance on implementing an Information Security Management System (ISMS), clarifying leadership roles and responsibilities. Understanding this standard helps debunk common misconceptions about ISMS leadership. 1. Myth: Leadership Can Delegate ISMS Responsibility Entirely vs 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝐼𝑆𝑂 27003 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑢𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑, 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠 𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐼𝑆𝑀𝑆 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡. 2. Myth: The Information Security Policy is a Static Document vs 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝐼𝑆𝑂 27003, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑦 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑒𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑣𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡. 3. Myth: Top Management’s Role Ends with Policy Approval vs 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑒𝑚𝑝ℎ𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑚𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐼𝑆𝑀𝑆 𝑏𝑒𝑦𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑦 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑎𝑙. 4. Myth: Roles and Responsibilities in ISMS Can Be Defined Informally vs 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝐼𝑆𝑂 27003 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝐼𝑆𝑀𝑆 𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑏𝑒 𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑, 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑑, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑. 5. Myth: ISMS Leadership Focuses Exclusively on Internal Processes vs 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑎𝑑𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑡𝑜 𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐼𝑆𝑀𝑆 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠. #ISO27003 #ISMSLeadershipMyths #InformationSecurity #CyberSecurity #LeadershipInISMS #ISOStandards #RiskManagement #ISMSImplementation #TopManagementResponsibilities #ContinuousImprovement #SecurityPolicy #BusinessContinuity #Governance #Compliance

2