Cybersecurity frameworks are the guidelines enterprises use to guard against cyberattacks. The typical framework describes the steps needed to address various cybersecurity risks, detecting latent vulnerabilities, and generally improving the enterprise’s digital defense. Any gaps discovered in the attack surface indicates that immediate steps should be taken to rebuild and strengthen cyber resilience.
Keri Pearlson, a senior lecturer and principal research scientist at the MIT Sloan School of Management, says there are many signs that indicate an existing cybersecurity framework needs attention. “If your cybersecurity framework hasn’t been reviewed in the last two months, if you haven’t been dynamically updating things, or if your team hasn’t yet incorporated AI into your cybersecurity thinking, you need to review and possibly rebuild your framework,” she says.
Are you risking enterprise security by relying on an outdated security framework? Here are warning signs that indicate it may be time for a much-need overhaul.
1. Not having a dynamic process for recognizing changes
The biggest mistake, Pearlson says, is failing to recognize that the current plan is out of date or simply not working. Breaches happen, but that doesn’t always mean your cyber framework needs rebuilding. It does, however, indicate that the framework needs to be rethought and redesigned.
Building a cyber-resilient organization requires thinking differently, Pearlson states. The best approach, she suggests, is deploying a dynamic process that watches for changes in the environment and initiates a rebuilding process.
“The key is to have the right sensing and responding mechanism — which is likely a combination of technology and human activities,” she says, noting that technology can sense change and identify anomalies, and people can evaluate whether the change is a risk that requires attention and investment.
2. Experiencing a successful cyberattack — of any size
Nothing highlights a weak cybersecurity framework better than a breach, says Steven Bucher, CSO at Mastercard. “I’ve seen firsthand how even a minor incident can reveal outdated protocols or gaps in employee training,” he states. “If your framework hasn’t kept pace with evolving threats or business needs, it’s time for a rebuild.”
Cyber threats are always evolving, so staying proactive with regular reviews and fostering a culture of cybersecurity awareness will help catch issues before they become crises, Bucher says. “Ultimately, keeping your framework robust and up-to-date is the best way to protect your organization and maintain trust.”
3. Continuous oversight becomes a challenge
If your framework can’t provide continuous oversight, or support proactive risk management, then it’s time to rebuild by aligning with established standards, such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, and integrating industry-specific compliance requirements as needed, says Dave Floyd, vice president of cybersecurity sales and service for Hughes Network Systems.
The best approach to rebuild a cybersecurity framework is to begin with the NIST framework and then overlay it with industry-specific compliance requirements, Floyd advises. This approach ensures that best practices and regulatory obligations for healthcare, financial, and other enterprises are fully addressed.
4. Your formal framework review process is measured in years
If there haven’t been any material changes to your framework in the past three-plus years, it’s a strong indication that your framework may be outdated, says Sandra McLeod, CISO at Zoom. “The cybersecurity landscape has evolved rapidly, especially with the rise of generative AI — your framework should reflect these shifts.”
McLeod recommends a complete a biannual framework review combined with a cursory review during the gap years. “This helps to ensure that the framework stays aligned with evolving threats, business changes, and regulatory requirements.”
Ideally, security leaders should always have their security framework in mind while maintaining a rough, running list of areas that could be improved, streamlined, or clarified, McLeod suggests. “These informal insights should be brought into discussions during the cursory reviews to keep continuous improvement top of mind.”
5. You’re continually chasing alerts without performing predictive assessments
If your organization is continually in a reactive state instead of a proactive posture, it’s time to re-evaluate the framework, says Nima Baiati, executive director and general manager of commercial software and security solutions at Lenovo.
If an organization is stuck in a cycle of continually chasing alerts and incidents, as well as reporting events after the fact instead of performing predictive threat assessments, data analysis, and forward planning, it’s time for a change, Baiati advises. “Of course, there will still be some reactive situations, but if they consume most of the bandwidth of daily operations, it’s probably just a matter of time before more significant incidents occur.”
Baiati suggests beginning with a solid understanding of your organization’s risk appetite and overall business strategy. “Security, when done right, can be a competitive advantage, since it minimizes operational disruption and optimizes trust,” he states. For example, financial institutions have a low appetite for risk and a critical need to protect the integrity of their data and their reputation. Their business strategy and security are inherently connected.
Also, because team members are more mobile than ever, endpoint security is now a focus for network security and needs to be included in the cybersecurity framework. “To build strong endpoint security, organizations should take a comprehensive, layered approach that safeguards all aspects of their digital environment — firmware, hardware, software, and the supply chain,” Baiati says. “Evaluate both on-device and cloud-based AI applications to ensure effective, real-time threat detection and response.”
6. KRIs and KPIs are trending negatively
If there’s a sense that key risk indicators (KRIs) and key performance indicators (KPIs) are headed in an unanticipated direction, your framework may need to be re-evaluated, says Sameer Ansari, head of the data privacy team lead at audit, risk, and compliance consultancy Protiviti.
Organizations that view their cybersecurity framework as a compliance checklist rather than as a tool to inform proper risk decisions are courting danger, Ansari warns. “Organizations should consider key business objectives and risks that they may face and apply the framework through that lens.”
When building or updating a framework, many cybersecurity leaders find themselves caught up in benchmarking or comparing themselves to other firms instead of focusing on what matters to their organization, Ansari says. Worse yet is believing that quantity is more important than quality. “Some cybersecurity chiefs will try to combine several different frameworks, creating an unmanageable ‘Frankenstein framework’ that becomes very hard to manage and sustain,” he warns.
7. You’ve taken a compliance-based approach
A common mistake many cybersecurity leaders make is designing a framework that’s primarily designed to “pass the audit,” says Daniel Tobok, CEO of incident response firm CYPFER, instead of targeting business objectives. He cautions that a compliance-only approach often excludes critical input from non-IT stakeholders and typically results in a framework that looks good on paper but fails to deliver meaningful protection in practice.
Ideally, a cybersecurity framework should evolve continuously, with priority given to the highest-risk areas, Tobok advises. “However, a full rebuild may be necessary when the existing framework no longer protects the organization effectively, or when the cost of incremental fixes outweighs the benefits.”
He adds that rebuilding is also warranted immediately after a major enterprise shift, such as a change to the business model, an amended regulatory environment, or an extended threat landscape, all of which can make the existing framework outdated or insufficient.
No Responses