If you’ve ever found yourself juggling multiple compliance frameworks—you know how quickly things can get messy. Different frameworks ask for similar things in slightly different ways. Meanwhile, your internal teams are trying to figure out who owns what, whether a control applies to one regulation or three, and how to keep up when the rules change.

That’s where compliance mapping comes in.

Compliance mapping is the practice of linking what regulators expect with what your organization actually does. It’s how you turn abstract requirements into concrete actions—and how you manage overlapping standards without duplicating work.

Done right, compliance mapping brings two big wins:

1. It connects regulations to your internal business operations.

This ensures that each requirement is addressed by a real policy, control, or process—not just documented on paper.

2. It identifies common ground across multiple frameworks.

Instead of treating every regulation as a silo, mapping shows where a single control can satisfy several requirements at once.

These two concepts work hand in hand. By mapping both horizontally across frameworks and vertically into operations, organizations build a structure that’s not just audit-ready—but resilient, efficient, and aligned with real-world risk.

Why You Need Compliance Mapping

Without regulatory rule mapping, organizations often fall into one of two traps:

• Redundant effort — Applying different controls for similar requirements across frameworks, wasting time and resources
  
• Risky gaps — Missing obligations because there’s no clear connection between what the law requires and what your organization actually does
  

Compliance mapping prevents both. It gives you:

• Clarity — Know exactly what regulations require and how you’re addressing them
  
• Consistency — Avoid duplication by applying unified controls where possible
  
• Control— Spot gaps early and act before they become audit findings
  

It also improves communication. Instead of siloed conversations between IT, legal, and compliance teams, you’re all working from the same map.

How Compliance Mapping Supports Corporate Governance

Governance isn’t just about setting rules—it’s about making sure your organization operates with clarity, consistency, and accountability. For that to happen, leadership needs a clear view of what’s required, what’s being done, and where the gaps are.

That’s where compliance and control mapping becomes essential.

When you map regulatory obligations directly to your business processes and controls, you’re creating a structured system that connects external expectations (like laws and standards) with internal actions (like policies, procedures, and roles). That’s the bridge governance teams rely on.

Here’s how compliance mapping strengthens governance in practice:

• It creates transparency

Leadership can see exactly how compliance is being met across the organization. No more guesswork, siloed information, or surprises during audits.

• It ensures accountability

Every control or requirement is tied to an owner, a process, and a record. That means when something changes—like a new regulation or a control failure—you know who’s responsible and what to do.

• It supports better decision-making

By visualizing your compliance posture in a centralized map, governance teams can prioritize risks, allocate resources, and make informed choices that align with both strategic goals and regulatory expectations.

• It builds resilience

Change is inevitable—whether it’s a new framework, a business pivot, or a shift in the threat landscape. A mapped compliance program helps you adapt quickly by knowing exactly which parts of the business are affected and how.

Where Automation Fits into Compliance Mapping

While regulatory rule mapping is fundamentally a strategic process, automation can play a supporting role—especially for organizations dealing with multiple frameworks or fast-changing regulations.

Here’s where automation adds value:

1. Accelerating Framework Adoption

When a new framework or standard is introduced (like ISO 42001 or the latest revision of NIST CSF), automation can speed up the mapping process—highlighting shared controls and minimizing redundant effort.

2. Supporting Complex Structures

For organizations with multiple business units, regions, or entities, automation helps ensure each area is mapped properly. It provides visibility into how compliance obligations play out across different parts of the business.

3. Reducing Human Error

By turning regulatory requirements into structured, actionable items, automation helps ensure nothing slips through the cracks. This is particularly useful for large teams working across silos.

The Core Elements of a Strong Compliance Mapping Program

If compliance mapping is the backbone of your GRC strategy, these are the bones that hold it together. Whether you’re starting from scratch or refining an existing process, these components make your compliance mapping meaningful and manageable:

1. A Central Source of Truth

Build a centralized repository that links regulations to internal policies, controls, and processes. This becomes your organization’s go-to place for understanding what’s required—and how those requirements are being met.

2. Clear Connections Between Requirements and Actions

Each regulation should be mapped to a corresponding control mapping or activity. This turns abstract text into something tangible your teams can act on—and helps spot overlaps across frameworks to reduce duplication.

3. Built-In Change Management

Regulatory environments don’t stand still. A strong compliance map makes it easy to update controls, assign new responsibilities, and document changes as they happen—keeping your risk posture current and auditable.

4. Cross-Functional Visibility

Effective mapping isn’t just for compliance teams. It should be understandable and accessible to stakeholders across IT, security, risk, and legal. A shared view fosters collaboration and avoids siloed efforts.

Benefits of Regulatory Compliance Mapping

Compliance mapping delivers real, tangible benefits—especially when organizations are juggling multiple frameworks, regions, and teams. Here’s how it transforms operations:

1. Do the Work Once, Check Off Multiple Boxes

One of the most immediate wins of compliance mapping is efficiency. By identifying overlapping requirements across frameworks, you can design a single control that satisfies all three. That means fewer duplicated efforts, less back-and-forth across teams, and significant time savings when it comes to evidence collection and audits.

2. Simpler, Smarter Compliance Processes

With a mapped system in place, regulations are tied directly to the controls and policies that fulfill them. This clarity helps teams cut through the noise and focus on what actually needs to get done—reducing both confusion and risk of non-compliance.

3. Streamlined Workflows and Ownership

When obligations change, mapped systems help route updates to the right people quickly. No one’s left guessing who owns what, and updates don’t get lost in email chains or forgotten spreadsheets. This clarity drives accountability and reduces delays.

4. Clear End-to-End Visibility

Regulatory compliance mapping makes your risk and compliance posture easier to understand—both internally and externally. You get a holistic view of how obligations are being met across the organization, which is especially valuable during audits, board reporting, and vendor assessments.

5. Agile Response to Change

Regulatory shifts are inevitable. Compliance mapping helps you respond without starting from scratch. By keeping requirements and actions connected, your teams can translate changes into adjustments—not overhauls.

DIY vs. Platform-Based Compliance Mapping: What’s the Difference—And Why It Matters

If you’re managing compliance at any meaningful scale, you’ve probably faced this question:

Should we build our own compliance mapping system in-house, or should we use a dedicated platform like Centraleyes?

It’s a fair question. Many teams start with the DIY approach: spreadsheets, shared drives, internal documentation, and lots of meetings. It feels flexible, low-cost, and familiar. You get to build something custom to your organization’s needs.

And in the early stages, it works.

But as your compliance environment grows more complex—new frameworks, more data, additional stakeholders—that patchwork starts to strain. Keeping everything aligned becomes its own full-time job. Small changes ripple across multiple files. Ownership becomes unclear. Audits become stressful.

That’s when many organizations start looking for something more scalable—and that’s where a platform like Centraleyes enters the picture.

Unlike a manual approach, platform-based compliance mapping offers structure from day one. Frameworks are pre-loaded. Controls can be linked across multiple standards. Dashboards show exactly where you stand at any moment. And instead of maintaining the map, you get to use it—to improve strategy, guide decisions, and stay ahead of change.

Side-by-Side Comparison: Manual vs. Centraleyes

Process Step	Manual (DIY)	With Centraleyes
Cataloging Requirements	Manually research, interpret, and log every framework that applies	Select from preloaded frameworks; start mapping right away
Building the Repository	Version-controlled spreadsheets or static docs; hard to scale or share	Centralized, live repository across teams with real-time updates
Mapping Controls	Each control linked manually—often duplicated across frameworks	Smart crosswalks auto-map one control to multiple frameworks
Assigning Ownership	Informal or unclear ownership; must manually track handoffs	Owners assigned in-platform with automatic task routing and reminders
Tracking Regulatory Changes	Must stay on top of global/regional updates manually	Real-time updates with alerts and impact guidance built in
Audit Preparation	Data pulled from multiple sources; inconsistent or incomplete	Exportable, audit-ready reports based on live mapping and evidence
Ongoing Maintenance	Difficult to manage across departments; version drift is common	Single system of record with review workflows, change logs, and full traceability

The Bottom Line

Manual mapping might feel manageable at first, but over time, it becomes difficult to scale, maintain, and trust. A platform like Centraleyes isn’t just about making compliance easier—it’s about turning compliance into a living system that supports your risk and governance goals.

Instead of reactive audits and scattered ownership, you get clarity, speed, and resilience built into your compliance process from day one.

Compliance Mapping Is How Strategy Meets Structure

When mapping is embedded into daily operations, compliance becomes less reactive and more intentional. It stops being a roadblock and starts acting like what it truly is: a strategic lever for smarter decisions, stronger alignment, and faster response to change.

That’s where Centraleyes makes the difference.

By automating the hardest parts of compliance mapping—framework selection, cross-mapping, ownership, and updates—Centraleyes helps you stop chasing spreadsheets and start leading with clarity. One control can satisfy multiple frameworks. One platform can give you visibility across your entire organization. And one smart decision can set you up for long-term success.

Ready to turn compliance into momentum?

The post Why Compliance Mapping is the Backbone of Risk and Governance Programs appeared first on Centraleyes.

What is EASA?

EASA has long been synonymous with excellence in aviation safety. As the regulatory authority for the European Union, EASA sets the standards that govern everything from aircraft design to operational protocols. Its mission is clear: to ensure that every aspect of aviation is as safe and reliable as possible. Cybersecurity has emerged as a non-negotiable safety pillar in an era where digital systems are as integral to flight operations as the engines themselves.

EASA recognized that modern aviation has become increasingly digital and expanded its regulatory reach to include cybersecurity. Regulation Part-IS is the latest initiative designed to create a robust framework that addresses emerging cyber risks threatening the aviation ecosystem.

Decoding EASA Regulation Part-IS

Regulation Part-IS is a comprehensive framework that redefines how aviation cybersecurity is managed. It is built on four key pillars, each designed to create a resilient defense against a dynamic threat landscape.

1. Rigorous Risk Management and Continuous Assessment

The first cornerstone of Regulation Part-IS is a dynamic, proactive approach to risk management. Under this pillar, every stakeholder in the aviation ecosystem is required to:

• Identify Vulnerabilities: Conduct thorough assessments of digital systems, networks, and connected devices to pinpoint potential weaknesses.
• Evaluate Threat Scenarios: Anticipate both external attacks and internal security lapses, prioritizing threats based on their potential impact on safety and operations.
• Implement Continuous Monitoring: Cybersecurity is not a one-time effort but an ongoing process. Continuous monitoring ensures that as new vulnerabilities emerge, they are identified and mitigated swiftly.

2. Robust System Certification and Lifecycle Compliance

According to EASA, aviation systems must be designed with security built in from the ground up. Regulation Part-IS mandates a rigorous certification process that extends throughout a system’s lifecycle:

• Secure-by-Design: New systems must integrate cybersecurity features from the initial design phase. This means that security protocols, encryption standards, and intrusion prevention measures are not afterthoughts but foundational elements.
• Ongoing Certification: EASA Certification is not a one-off event. It is a continuous commitment to maintaining and upgrading security measures through regular updates, patches, and audits.
• Independent Audits: Third-party assessments play a critical role in verifying that systems adhere to the highest cybersecurity standards, fostering an environment of transparency and trust.

3. Swift Incident Reporting and Coordinated Response

Regulation Part-IS introduces a mandatory reporting mechanism and establishes stringent response protocols:

• Immediate Reporting: Any cybersecurity incident, no matter how minor it may seem, must be reported to the relevant authorities without delay. This rapid communication channel ensures that potential breaches are contained before they escalate.
• Comprehensive Response Plans: Every aviation organization is required to have a well-defined incident response plan. These plans outline clear procedures for neutralizing threats, minimizing operational disruptions, and recovering quickly.
• Learning from Incidents: Post-incident analyses are integral to the process. By studying each incident in detail, organizations can refine their strategies, fortify their defenses, and prevent future occurrences.

4. Collaborative Cybersecurity: Uniting for a Common Cause

Cybersecurity is a team sport, and Regulation Part-IS underscores the importance of collaboration. Recognizing that no single entity can address the multifaceted nature of cyber threats alone, EASA promotes a culture of collective defense:

• Information Sharing: Airlines, manufacturers, and regulatory bodies are encouraged to share threat intelligence and cybersecurity best practices. This collaborative network acts as an early-warning system, enabling all stakeholders to prepare for and respond to emerging threats.
• Joint Exercises and Simulations: Regular cybersecurity drills and simulations help test the efficacy of incident response plans, ensuring that every player in the ecosystem is ready to act in unison.
• Public-Private Partnerships: By forging strong partnerships between government agencies, industry leaders, and cybersecurity experts, EASA is creating a unified front against cyber adversaries. These collaborations are essential for pooling resources, sharing expertise, and developing innovative solutions.

EASA’s Updated Rulemaking: Pioneering the Future of Cybersecurity

EASA’s commitment to aviation safety is an ongoing journey. The air safety agency’s updated rulemaking program reflects its unwavering focus on enhancing cybersecurity. Recent updates have introduced several new tasks that reinforce the regulatory framework:

• Updating the Regulatory Framework for Aerodrome Protection

New tasks are underway to ensure that the regulatory framework comprehensively addresses the protection of aerodrome surroundings—a critical component in mitigating cybersecurity risks.

• Establishing Information Security Frameworks

With cyber threats evolving at breakneck speed, establishing robust frameworks for information security has become paramount. This task aims to integrate advanced security measures into all levels of aviation operations.

• Enhanced Noise and Safety Requirements for Advanced Aircraft

As new types of aircraft—such as VTOL (Vertical Take-Off and Landing) vehicles—enter the market, EASA is proactively developing noise and safety requirements that include cybersecurity considerations.

• Integrity Verification for Helicopter Certification

Ensuring continuous integrity verification in certification processes is another strategic focus, underscoring the importance of cybersecurity throughout an asset’s lifecycle.

Which Countries Comply with EASA?

EASA member states are the countries that participate in the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) regulatory system. While EASA is an agency of the European Union, its membership extends beyond the EU alone. In addition to the 27 EU countries, EASA also includes non-EU states that have signed agreements to follow its aviation safety rules. These non-EU participants are typically part of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) or have special arrangements through the European Common Aviation Area (ECAA).

As of now, EASA member states include:

• All 27 EU countries
  
• EFTA countries like Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, and Liechtenstein

There aren’t many non-European countries directly governed by EASA. However, the agency has established international partnerships and regulatory harmonization agreements with countries that share strong aviation and trade relationships with Europe.

Overcoming Challenges in Aviation Cybersecurity

Implementing Regulation Part-IS is a bold step forward, but it has challenges. The rapid pace of technological advancement and the ever-evolving nature of cyber threats present several hurdles:

Legacy Systems Versus Modern Requirements

Many aviation systems were designed in an era when cybersecurity was not a primary concern. Upgrading these legacy systems to meet modern standards is a complex and resource-intensive process. EASA’s regulations recognize this challenge and emphasize a balanced approach that safeguards existing operations while paving the way for future innovation.

Strapped Resources

For many aviation operators—especially smaller ones—allocating the necessary resources for comprehensive cybersecurity can be daunting. The financial and human capital required to implement and maintain robust security measures is significant. However, the long-term benefits of a secure digital infrastructure far outweigh the upfront investments. EASA is aware of these challenges and is working to provide guidance and support to help all stakeholders meet the required standards.

Keeping Pace with the Threat Landscape

Cyber threats are in constant flux. What works today may not be sufficient tomorrow. Regulation Part-IS is designed to be adaptive, with built-in mechanisms for continuous review and improvement. By embracing a dynamic approach to risk management and incident response, EASA is ensuring that the industry remains resilient in the face of emerging cyber risks.

Charting a Secure Future with EASA

In an industry where every second counts and the stakes have never been higher, EASA compliance is both visionary and practical. It acknowledges the challenges of a digital age while providing concrete solutions to ensure that every flight, every system, and every passenger is protected against the invisible yet ever-present threats of cyberattacks.

The journey toward a cybersecure aviation landscape is just beginning, and with Regulation Part-IS as its compass, EASA is ensuring that every flight takes off with confidence, every system operates with integrity, and every traveler can soar knowing that their safety is the agency’s top priority.
For those looking to explore EASA Regulation Part‑IS in greater detail, you’ll be pleased to know that Centraleyes features the full content of Regulation Part‑IS on our extensive framework library.

The post Decoding EASA Regulation Part-IS: A Comprehensive Guide to Strengthening Aviation Cybersecurity appeared first on Centraleyes.

Most people think of running a college or university as a purely educational pursuit. And while that remains at the heart of higher education, the reality today is much broader. Leading a university also means managing a very complex set of risks: cyberattacks, financial instability, regulatory shifts, and reputational fallout, just to name a few.

These risks threaten an institution’s ability to educate, innovate, and serve its community. What complicates matters further is that these risks are emerging from different environments than what you’d expect to hear in the higher education sector.

Understanding Risk Management in Higher Education

Risk management in higher education institutions involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks that could impede the achievement of academic and operational objectives. This encompasses a broad spectrum of areas, including compliance, financial health, campus safety, and technological infrastructure. A comprehensive approach ensures that colleges and universities can proactively address potential threats and maintain their commitment to educational excellence.​

The Complex Risk Landscape of Higher Education

Unlike corporations, universities are multifaceted ecosystems. They manage:

• Student data (regulated by FERPA),
  
• Health data (regulated by HIPAA for medical schools),
  
• Research projects (often subject to federal grants),
  
• Physical campuses and housing  with safety obligations,
  
• Housing operations with social obligations.
  

Top Challenges in Risk Management for Colleges and Universities

1. Cybersecurity

Cyber threats are growing fast, and ransomware is leading the charge. In the first three months of 2025 alone, 81 ransomware attacks hit education institutions around the world. That’s a 69% increase compared to the same time last year.

The average ransom demand is $608,000. In one case, hackers asked for $1.5 million from a university in Taiwan.

Universities are targets because they store valuable information: student records, research data, and healthcare details. And they often rely on complex IT systems, with different departments running their own tools, which can make cybersecurity even harder.

Add in the complexity of Shadow IT. This refers to cases where departments use unsanctioned apps or systems and universities face blind spots that traditional corporate environments don’t. Faculty members often resist centralized IT control in the name of academic freedom, creating a patchwork of systems that can be difficult to secure.

Beyond the Ransom—Operational Fallout

The real damage of ransomware isn’t just financial.

Consider the University of Notre Dame’s cyberattack earlier this year. While ransom amounts weren’t disclosed, the university suffered operational paralysis:

• Admissions systems went offline.
• Research projects were stalled.
• Payroll systems were disrupted.
  

This echoes across the sector. Cyberattacks increasingly lead to downtime, loss of trust, and regulatory scrutiny—especially when student data leaks occur.

Cyber Insurance: Another Layer of Complexity

With ransomware on the rise, cyber insurance premiums are spiking. Insurers are demanding risk quantification—meaning institutions need to demonstrate they have:

• Incident response plans.
• Regular risk assessments.
• Vendor risk management processes.
  

Without these, securing affordable cyber insurance becomes difficult.

2. Financial Instability and Revenue Model Challenges

The financial pressures on higher education institutions are intensifying.

Beyond tuition dependency, enrollment cliffs—a decline in the college-age population starting in 2025—are looming large. Even prestigious universities are diversifying into non-traditional revenue streams like:

• Real estate development (campus expansions, housing projects).
• Commercializing research (licensing patents, startups).
• Athletic programs (dealing with NIL regulations for student-athletes).
  

While diversification can be a risk buffer, it introduces new risks:

• Real estate markets fluctuate.
• Athletic program revenues are tied to performance and regulation changes.
• Research commercialization depends on market success.
  

3. Regulatory Compliance and Legal Risks

Navigating the complex web of regulations is a significant challenge for higher education institutions. The Protiviti Top Risks Report 2024 emphasizes heightened regulatory changes and scrutiny, particularly concerning Title IX, student loan forgiveness, and accreditation issues. Non-compliance can result in legal repercussions, financial penalties, and reputational damage, underscoring the need for vigilant risk management in education.

Regulatory Risk Case-in-Point: Title IX Changes

Title IX, which mandates gender equity in education, underwent significant changes in April 2024:

• Broader definitions of sexual harassment.
• Expanded protections for LGBTQ+ students.
• New grievance and investigation procedures.
  

These shifts required immediate updates to:

• Policies across campuses.
• Staff training.
• Complaint handling procedures.
  

But the challenge wasn’t just compliance. In states with opposing legislation (e.g., restrictions on transgender rights), universities faced legal grey zones—risking lawsuits whether they aligned with federal or state mandates.

Compliance Fatigue and Title IX

Frequent regulatory changes like those under Title IX contribute to compliance fatigue—a growing issue in higher education. Universities stretched thin by existing mandates now face cultural, legal, and operational stress from these shifts.

4. Campus Safety and Crisis Management

Ensuring the safety and well-being of students, faculty, and staff is a fundamental responsibility of educational institutions. The Council of Independent Colleges has developed case studies addressing campus violence, health emergencies, and free expression challenges, providing valuable insights into effective risk management strategies. Proactive measures, including emergency preparedness plans and regular safety drills, are essential components of a comprehensive risk management framework.​

Campus safety extends beyond active threats.

Today’s risk landscape includes:

• Mental health crises (which strain campus police and counseling services).
  
• Climate risks (floods, wildfires, extreme heat).
  
• Public protests (which can escalate into broader safety issues).
  

5. Reputational Risks and Public Perception

In the age of social media and instant communication, reputational risks can escalate rapidly. Incidents involving academic misconduct, financial scandals, or controversial policies can tarnish an institution’s image. The recent funding blockade of Oxford Business College amid a student loan scandal highlights the potential consequences of reputational damage. Implementing robust governance structures and transparent communication strategies is vital to mitigate such risks.

 Universities are particularly vulnerable to:

• Student protests.
  
• Faculty misconduct scandals.
  
• Policy controversies.

Building an Effective Higher Education Risk Management Framework

Here’s how colleges and universities are meeting the challenges of risk in higher education today.

1. Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Integration

Many institutions still manage risk in isolated silos—cybersecurity in IT, compliance in legal, finances in the CFO’s office. But risks don’t respect these boundaries. Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) brings all those risks together into one unified view.

For example, when the University of Maryland, Baltimore integrated ERM into its strategic planning, it wasn’t just a compliance exercise. It gave leadership a shared understanding of risks across departments, helping them make better decisions on everything from funding research to safeguarding student data.

2. Leveraging Technology and Data Analytics

Risk management isn’t guesswork anymore. Institutions like Eastern Michigan University are using AI-driven analytics to identify patterns—such as which students are at risk of dropping out—so they can intervene early.

This same data-driven approach can be applied to compliance tracking, cyber risk, or financial forecasting. But here’s the challenge: without centralized systems, institutions end up juggling multiple tools—spreadsheets for finance, emails for compliance deadlines, and siloed dashboards for cyber risk.

3. Strengthening Governance and Oversight

Effective risk management needs buy-in from the top. Boards and leadership must be involved, not just informed. Groups like URMIA help universities build strong governance frameworks, but leadership still needs the right GRC tools to see risks clearly.

4. Continuous Training and Education

Policies only work when people understand them. Ongoing training and engagement ensure that faculty, staff, and even students know how to identify and respond to risks.

Proven Solutions and Best Practices

The strategies we listed above work best when they’re paired with practical tools that help institutions turn strategies into action. The following solutions are what top institutions are using to stay ahead:

1. Centralized Compliance Systems

Tracking compliance regulations, deadlines, and policy changes across departments can be overwhelming. Tools like the Higher Education Compliance Alliance’s matrix offer guidelines, but institutions need real-time, customizable platforms that fit their specific risk profile.

2. Comprehensive Crisis Response Plans

From natural disasters to cyberattacks, universities must be prepared for anything. Response plans only work when they’re kept current and tested regularly. Having centralized systems that store, track, and update these plans makes a difference when time is critical.

3. Financial Risk Assessments

With enrollment shifts and funding pressures, financial health is at risk. Institutions need tools that help them model scenarios, track revenue diversification, and respond to external disruptions (like FAFSA delays).

4. Transparent Communication

In a crisis, communication matters as much as response. Whether it’s a data breach or policy change, stakeholders need timely, accurate information. Platforms that integrate communication into risk workflows make it easier to deliver the right message at the right time.

Why Higher Education Institutions Are Choosing Centraleyes

Managing risk across all these areas—cybersecurity, compliance, finance, governance, and communication—requires more than a patchwork of tools. That’s where Centraleyes comes in.

Centraleyes offers a unified platform that brings all these risk areas together in one place. It’s designed to help institutions:

• Visualize risk across departments and frameworks.
  
• Automate routine tasks, like compliance tracking and risk assessments.
  
• Provide leadership with real-time dashboards, supporting better decision-making.
  

In today’s fast-changing environment, manual processes and siloed systems can’t keep up. Centraleyes helps institutions move from reactive to proactive risk management—so they can focus on their educational missions.

Whether it’s preparing for the next cyber threat, navigating Title IX updates, or responding to enrollment shifts, Centraleyes gives universities the tools to manage risk efficiently and effectively.

Because higher education should be about taking intellectual risks—not worrying about operational ones.

The post Risk Management in Higher Education: Top Challenges and Proven Solutions appeared first on Centraleyes.

Organizations devote significant resources to their compliance risk assessments each year. Yet many compliance leads and senior executives feel stuck in a cycle of repetition and question whether these efforts yield meaningful benefits. 

Do you find that your risk assessment process helps you tackle risk effectively?

Does it offer a clear view of your top regulatory compliance concerns? 

Often, the answer is a frustrating “no.”

In this guide, we dive into the heart of these challenges, exploring why many compliance risk assessments fall short and offering innovative strategies to overcome them. We’ll highlight top compliance risk assessment solutions to help your organization manage compliance more effectively.

Maybe it’s time to rethink and revitalize the compliance risk assessment process to make it truly impactful.

Designed by Freepik

Understanding Compliance Risk Assessments

A compliance risk assessment is a structured approach to identifying and evaluating the risks associated with non-compliance to laws, regulations, standards, and ethical norms. Its primary objective is to mitigate legal liabilities, financial penalties, and reputational damage caused by compliance failures.

The process begins with thoroughly reviewing internal policies and procedures against external legal requirements. It then assesses the likelihood of non-compliance and the potential repercussions. In short, a compliance risk assessment aims to uncover gaps within your compliance framework and understand how these gaps could impact your business operations and strategic goals.

Breaking Free from the Compliance Rut

The Annual Ritual: A Stale Approach

Compliance risk assessments often become an annual ritual, executed out of necessity rather than genuine strategic intent. This routine process typically produces familiar results and unmeaningful insights. The challenge lies in transforming this ritual into a dynamic and valuable exercise.

Misalignment with Organizational Goals

One of the primary issues is the misalignment between risk assessments and organizational goals. Compliance risk assessments should provide a clear pathway to addressing the most pressing compliance issues, yet they often remain too broad and disconnected from the organization’s specific needs and strategic objectives.

The Imperative for Innovation

To escape this cycle, organizations need to innovate. This means adopting new methodologies, integrating advanced technologies, and fostering a proactive compliance culture. Let’s explore some novel strategies to achieve this transformation.

Strategies for Transforming Compliance Risk Assessments

Redefine the Purpose

Before diving into the assessment process, redefine its purpose. Shift the focus from identifying compliance risks to driving strategic decision-making. Compliance risk assessments should be seen as tools to enhance overall business performance, not just as regulatory checklists.

Integrate Business Intelligence

Leveraging business intelligence (BI) tools can significantly enhance the value of compliance risk assessments. BI tools can analyze vast amounts of data, providing insights into trends and emerging risks. Organizations can move from reactive to proactive risk management by integrating BI with compliance processes.

Foster a Collaborative Culture

Compliance is not the responsibility of a single department; it’s a collective effort. Encourage collaboration across departments to ensure a holistic approach to risk management. Regular cross-functional workshops and training sessions can help break down silos and promote a culture of shared responsibility.

Use Predictive Analytics

Predictive analytics can transform the way organizations approach compliance risk assessments. By analyzing historical data and identifying patterns, predictive models can forecast potential compliance issues before they arise. This proactive approach allows organizations to mitigate risks more effectively.

Tailor Assessments to Organizational Context

Generic assessments are of limited value. Tailor the risk assessment process to your organization’s specific context. Consider industry-specific regulations, organizational structure, and strategic goals. This tailored approach ensures that the assessments are relevant and actionable.

Top 9 Compliance Risk Assessment Tools for 2025

To effectively manage compliance risk, leveraging the right tools is crucial. Here are the top seven compliance risk assessment tools for 2025:

1. Centraleyes

Centraleyes offers comprehensive compliance risk assessment software integrating various compliance frameworks and methodologies. It provides dynamic risk scoring, real-time monitoring, and robust reporting capabilities, making it a top choice for organizations aiming for proactive compliance management.

The process starts with an automated scan that picks up gaps by analyzing internal controls, other frameworks, and relevant threat intelligence. This scan helps you understand your starting point and builds an initial risk profile based on your existing controls and regulatory requirements.

Once risks are identified, the AI-powered risk register creates an advanced remediation process. This process automatically generates tickets, assigns tasks, and allows for collaboration across teams to ensure efficient remediation of compliance gaps. The platform not only tracks the resolution of each risk but also provides ongoing real-time updates to help organizations stay ahead of emerging threats. With its cross-framework compliance mapping, Centraleyes ensures that once a control is compliant in one framework, it’s automatically reflected across related standards, reducing redundancy and enhancing efficiency.

Centraleyes’ collaborative features streamline communication between teams, ensuring that all stakeholders are aligned in resolving compliance issues quickly and efficiently. Its customizable reporting offers actionable insights, allowing businesses to stay in control of their compliance posture and make informed decisions based on real-time data.

2. RSA Archer

RSA Archer is known for its advanced compliance risk assessment framework. It supports scenario analysis, predictive analytics, and detailed risk assessment reports, enabling organizations to align their compliance strategies with business objectives effectively.

3. MetricStream

MetricStream’s compliance risk assessment tools are designed to streamline and enhance the risk assessment process. With automated workflows, data visualization, and continuous monitoring, MetricStream helps organizations maintain compliance and manage risks efficiently.

4. NAVEX Global

NAVEX Global offers a suite of compliance risk assessment software solutions that cater to various industries. Its tools include compliance risk assessment questionnaires, dynamic reporting, and robust analytics, making it easier for organizations to identify and mitigate compliance risks.

5. LogicGate

LogicGate’s Risk Cloud platform provides a flexible and scalable compliance risk assessment methodology. It integrates seamlessly with existing systems, offers comprehensive risk assessments, and delivers actionable insights through intuitive dashboards and reports.

6. Wolters Kluwer

Wolters Kluwer’s compliance risk assessment tools focus on regulatory compliance and risk management. They provide in-depth compliance risk assessment reports, continuous monitoring, and scenario-based planning, helping organizations stay ahead of regulatory changes.

7. Galvanize

Galvanize, now part of Diligent, offers advanced compliance risk assessment solutions that leverage AI and machine learning. These tools provide predictive insights, automated compliance workflows, and real-time risk assessments, enabling organizations to manage compliance risks proactively.

8. Onspring

Onspring offers a cloud-based platform designed to streamline compliance and risk management workflows. It provides customizable risk assessments, reporting capabilities, and integrations with various regulatory frameworks. With automation and data visualization, Onspring helps organizations continuously monitor compliance risks and take proactive steps to mitigate them.

9. Resolver

Resolver’s platform offers a comprehensive solution for managing compliance risk assessments, helping organizations identify and evaluate risks across various regulatory standards. The platform integrates risk management, incident tracking, and compliance reporting, offering a holistic view of an organization’s compliance posture.

Techniques for Effective Assessments

Dynamic Risk Scoring

Traditional risk-scoring methods can be static and unresponsive to changes. Implement a dynamic risk scoring system that continuously updates based on real-time data. This approach provides a more accurate and current view of the organization’s risk landscape.

Scenario Analysis and Simulation

Move beyond static risk assessments by incorporating scenario analysis and simulation. Create hypothetical scenarios to test the organization’s response to potential compliance breaches. This method helps identify vulnerabilities and improve preparedness.

Continuous Monitoring and Feedback Loops

Risk assessments should not be a once-a-year activity. Implement continuous monitoring systems to monitor compliance risks in real time. Establish feedback loops to ensure that the insights gained from monitoring are used to refine and improve the assessment process.

Leveraging Technology for Enhanced Compliance

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

AI and machine learning can revolutionize compliance risk assessments. These technologies can analyze vast datasets to identify patterns and predict future risks, providing a more comprehensive view of potential issues. AI can also automate routine tasks, freeing up compliance teams to focus on strategic activities.

Blockchain for Transparency and Accountability

Blockchain technology offers a new level of transparency and accountability in compliance. By creating immutable records of compliance activities, blockchain can enhance trust and provide clear audit trails. This technology can be particularly useful in industries with stringent regulatory requirements.

Cloud-Based Compliance Platforms

Adopt cloud-based compliance platforms to streamline the assessment process. These platforms offer centralized data storage, real-time collaboration, and advanced analytics, making compliance management more efficient and effective.

Building a Proactive Compliance Culture

Education and Training

Invest in ongoing education and training programs to ensure that all employees understand their role in compliance. Regular training sessions can keep staff updated on the latest regulations and best practices.

Leadership Commitment

Leadership commitment is crucial for fostering a compliance culture. Senior executives should actively participate in the compliance process, demonstrating their commitment through actions and resource allocation.

Open Communication

Encourage open communication about compliance issues. Create channels for employees to report concerns and provide feedback. This openness can help identify potential risks early and foster a culture of transparency.

Compliance Risk  Assessments vs. Other Risk Assessments

Differentiating compliance risk assessments from other risk assessments is crucial for managing legal and regulatory threats effectively. While enterprise and internal audit risk assessments cover a broad range of risks, they often lack focus on specific compliance issues. Compliance risk assessments adopt a targeted approach, identifying and mitigating risks related to laws and regulations. This specialized focus ensures that organizations address compliance threats thoroughly, protecting against legal penalties and reputational damage. 

In essence, enterprise risk assessments are broad, while compliance risk assessments are precise and regulatory-focused.

The AI Hesitation: A New Frontier in Compliance Risk Assessment

Compliance teams are under pressure to do more with less—and artificial intelligence seems like the natural answer. Every day, more companies promise to automate tedious processes like security reviews and privacy data pulls. For many, it’s the first real shot at scaling compliance without hiring full-time staff.

But 2025 has shown that even the most promising tools come with strings attached.

“We had a lot of pushback… These are unknown vendors. We’re all trying to make sure we don’t make mistakes because there are real stakes here now with GDPR and CPRA,”
—Rob Priore, Sr. Manager of Compliance Technology, ZoomInfo

ZoomInfo eventually adopted startup AI tools—but only after building strict guardrails around data usage and limiting system access. The upside? They eliminated offshore contractors and saved hours of meeting time. But getting there wasn’t easy.

According to Forrester analyst Alla Valente, even though nearly a quarter of companies using generative AI have faced legal action, most are still moving forward—particularly in areas like scenario modeling and automated documentation.

Why This Matters for Risk Assessments

For risk professionals, the message is clear: the AI wave is already reshaping the compliance landscape, but trust in the tools is lagging behind innovation. The uncertainty itself has become a risk factor.

As one compliance officer at a major logistics firm put it:

“We’re testing generative AI via our existing vendors… but we’re still evaluating whether it’s secure, reliable, transparent, privacy-focused—and ethical.”

In this climate, AI risk management is becoming part of the compliance process itself. 

Compliance risk assessments in 2025 need to consider:

• Whether your current tech stack includes generative AI
• How those AI tools handle sensitive data
• What regulatory frameworks (like GDPR, CPRA, or upcoming AI laws) apply to their use
• How quickly you could pivot if regulations shift midstream
  

This doesn’t mean you should avoid AI—but your risk assessment toolkit should now include a section for AI-specific risk factors and mitigation strategies.

Centraleyes: Streamlining Compliance Risk Assessment with Advanced Tools

In the rapidly evolving compliance landscape, organizations need robust tools to stay ahead of regulatory requirements and manage their risk posture effectively. Centraleyes is a powerful solution designed to simplify and enhance the compliance risk assessment process.

Centraleyes offers a well-structured compliance risk assessment framework that integrates seamlessly with its advanced tools. This framework is not just a static model but a dynamic system that adapts to your organization’s needs. It begins with a comprehensive compliance risk assessment questionnaire that gathers critical information about your current compliance status and risk exposure.

This questionnaire is designed to capture a broad spectrum of risk factors, providing you with an overall picture of your risk posture. From this initial assessment, you can drill down into specific compliance frameworks relevant to your industry or operational area.

The platform’s compliance risk assessment methodology ensures that your risk evaluation is thorough and systematic. Centraleyes uses a structured approach to assess and prioritize risks, helping you identify potential vulnerabilities and compliance gaps. This methodology supports various compliance risk assessment tools to ensure that your risk management strategy is both comprehensive and actionable.

One of Centraleyes’ standout features is its cross-mapping capability. When you achieve compliance with a control in one framework, Centraleyes automatically applies this compliance to related frameworks. This feature simplifies the management of multiple compliance requirements, reducing duplication of effort and ensuring that your risk management practices are aligned across different standards.

Centraleyes’ compliance risk assessment software integrates these features into a user-friendly interface, making it easier to manage and track your compliance efforts. The software provides real-time updates and insights, helping you stay on top of your compliance obligations and respond proactively to emerging risks.

Once your assessment is complete, Centraleyes generates detailed compliance risk assessment reports that offer actionable insights. These reports not only highlight areas of concern but also provide recommendations for mitigating identified risks. The reports are designed to be clear and actionable, making it easier for your team to implement necessary changes and improvements.

Centraleyes ensures you have everything to manage and mitigate compliance risks in 2024 and beyond.

The post Best 9 Compliance Risk Assessment Tools for 2025 appeared first on Centraleyes.

Cyber risk scores measure the potential impact and likelihood of cyber threats. These scores help organizations prioritize their security efforts, allocate resources efficiently, and communicate risks to stakeholders clearly.

It’s important to note that while risk scoring is an integral part of risk management, it is not the same as a full risk assessment. Risk scoring is a component of the broader risk assessment process, which involves identifying, analyzing, and thoroughly evaluating risks. Essentially, risk scoring helps quantify or qualify risks. Whatever the method, it provides a basis for prioritizing actions.

Designed by Freepik

Methods for Calculating Cybersecurity Risk Scores

Various methods exist to calculate cybersecurity risk scores. Here, we’ll explore seven common methodologies and explain how each one works and the type of scores it produces.

1. Basic Risk Formula

The primary formula for calculating risk score is a straightforward equation. It involves multiplying the likelihood of a threat occurring by the potential impact of that threat:

Risk Score=Likelihood×Impact

This formula is straightforward and provides a quick way to assess risk. When it comes to a formula for calculating risk score in threat modelling, the equation gets more complex. But that’s for a different blog.

2. A Better Formula for Calculating Cyber Risk

The first method explained above is very simplistic. Here’s another commonly used formula, along with an explanation of how it’s calculated.

1. Threat Likelihood (TL): How likely is an attack? The more exposed your system, the higher the likelihood.
   
2. Vulnerability Severity (VS): How serious is the vulnerability? Is it an easy target or a hard one?
   
3. Impact Assessment (IA): What would the financial or reputational impact be if the attack occurred?
   

The Risk (R) is then calculated using this formula:
Risk = Threat Likelihood × Vulnerability Severity × Impact Assessment

3. FAIR (Factor Analysis of Information Risk)

FAIR is a more sophisticated approach that quantifies risk into monetary values, providing a detailed financial perspective on risk. FAIR divides risk into multiple components, including threat event frequency, vulnerability, and loss magnitude. The core concept of FAIR is to calculate the probable financial loss by considering these factors:

Risk=Probability of Threat Event×Vulnerability×Impact

By converting risk into financial terms, FAIR helps organizations understand the potential economic impact of cyber threats. This makes it easier to communicate risks to business stakeholders and prioritize mitigation strategies.

4. CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System)

While not a direct risk-scoring method, CVSS is often used as a component in risk management frameworks. CVSS provides a numerical score (from 0 to 10) that represents the severity of a software vulnerability. This score can then be incorporated into broader risk calculations to assess the overall risk posed by specific vulnerabilities.

Is CVSS Considered a Risk Scoring Method?

CVSS primarily focuses on the severity of a given vulnerability and does not account for the likelihood of the vulnerability being exploited within a particular environment or an organization’s unique circumstances.

In contrast, a risk-scoring method measures both the likelihood and impact of a threat exploiting a vulnerability. It provides a holistic view of the risk by integrating various factors that influence both the probability of an attack and its potential consequences. Therefore, while CVSS is a valuable tool for assessing vulnerability severity, it is not a complete risk-scoring method. It does not provide the full picture needed for comprehensive risk management. The whole picture would need to include an understanding of how likely a threat is to exploit a vulnerability in a given context.

5. NIST SP 800-30

The NIST SP 800-30 framework offers a comprehensive approach to risk assessment, including a detailed methodology for calculating risk scores. The process involves:

1. Preparation: Define the scope of the risk assessment and establish a risk management strategy.
2. Threat Identification: Identify potential threats to the organization’s assets.
3. Vulnerability Identification: Determine vulnerabilities that could be exploited by the identified threats.
4. Impact Analysis: Evaluate the potential impact of successful threat exploitation.
5. Likelihood Determination: Assess the likelihood of threat occurrence and successful exploitation.
6. Risk Determination: Combine the results of the impact and likelihood analyses to calculate risk scores.
7. Control Recommendations: Recommend security controls to mitigate identified risks.
8. Documentation and Reporting: Document the findings and report them to stakeholders for informed decision-making.

The NIST framework is iterative, allowing for continuous improvement and refinement based on new information and changing conditions.

6. OCTAVE (Operationally Critical Threat, Asset, and Vulnerability Evaluation)

OCTAVE is a risk assessment methodology that emphasizes organizational context. It involves three phases: building asset-based threat profiles, identifying infrastructure vulnerabilities, and developing security strategies and plans. Risk scores are derived from the analysis of threats, vulnerabilities, and the impact on critical assets.

7. ISO/IEC 27005

ISO/IEC 27005 provides guidelines for information security risk management and is part of the ISO/IEC 27000 family of standards. The ISO method involves several steps:

1. Context Establishment: Define the risk management context, including the scope, boundaries, and risk criteria.
2. Risk Assessment: Identify risks, analyze them based on likelihood and impact, and evaluate the level of risk.
3. Risk Treatment: Develop and implement risk treatment plans to mitigate, transfer, or accept risks based on organizational objectives.

ISO/IEC 27005 uses a structured approach to assess and manage risks systematically, aligning with international best practices in information security management.

8. Centraleyes Approach

Centraleyes utilizes methodologies similar to the Loss Distribution Approach (LDA), commonly used in financial institutions. LDA estimates potential losses by analyzing historical data, industry benchmarks, and expert judgment. Centraleyes combines these assessments into an annual loss distribution, providing insights into potential financial impacts from cyber risks.

9. MITRE ATT&CK: Behavior-Based Context for Cyber Risk Scoring

While not a numeric scoring system, the MITRE ATT&CK® framework plays an increasingly important role in how organizations evaluate cyber risk—particularly in threat-informed and behavioral risk scoring models.

What It Is

MITRE ATT&CK is a publicly accessible, continuously updated framework that maps the tactics and techniques used by real-world adversaries. Rather than estimating the likelihood or impact of generic threats, it catalogs how specific actions are actually carried out, and which stages of an attack they belong to.

How It Fits into Risk Scoring

ATT&CK is not designed to produce a numeric score on its own. Instead, it provides a structured way to evaluate exposure and defensive coverage against known attacker behaviors. Organizations can use this framework to answer key risk questions such as:

• Are we monitoring for the techniques most commonly used against our industry?
• Do we have effective controls in place to detect or mitigate these techniques?
• Where are our visibility or detection gaps across the attack lifecycle?
  

By mapping known adversary techniques (from ATT&CK) to existing controls or gaps—and overlaying that with threat intelligence, critical asset mapping, and business context—security teams can derive a risk profile grounded in attacker behavior. This makes ATT&CK especially useful for organizations seeking qualitative or semi-quantitative insights into their cyber risk.

Strengths

• Real-world, adversary-aligned structure
• Helps prioritize risks by likely attacker behavior and coverage gaps
• Adaptable across cloud, enterprise, mobile, and ICS environments
  

Limitations

• Does not output a traditional numeric risk score
• Requires internal mapping and maturity to be operationally effective
• Best used as a supplement to other quantitative frameworks like FAIR or NIST 800-30
  

How to Calculate Risk Scores: A Practical Guide

Now that we’ve explored different methodologies, let’s walk through a practical example of calculating a risk score using the basic risk formula. Suppose you’re assessing the risk of a phishing attack on your organization.

1. Identify the Threat: Phishing attack.
2. Estimate the Likelihood: Based on historical data, you estimate a 30% chance of a phishing attack occurring within the next year.
3. Determine the Impact: If a phishing attack is successful, the potential impact is significant, with an estimated cost of $500,000 in damages.
4. Calculate the Risk Score: Using the basic risk formula:

Risk Score=Likelihood×Impact

Risk Score=0.3×500,000=150,000

This score provides a quantifiable measure of the potential risk, helping you prioritize your mitigation efforts.

Smart Shopping: What to Look Out For

With numerous cybers security solutions touting their ability to score risk, it’s crucial to be discerning. Here are some key considerations:

Over-Reliance on Automation

While automated risk-scoring solutions can save time and provide consistency, they should not replace human judgment. Automated tools may need the more contextual understanding that experienced professionals bring to the table. Buyers should ensure that any automated tool allows for human intervention and review.

Lack of Transparency

Some risk-scoring solutions use proprietary algorithms that are not fully transparent to users. This lack of transparency can be problematic as it prevents users from understanding how scores are calculated and whether the methodology aligns with their specific needs and risk landscape. Buyers should look for solutions that offer clear explanations of their scoring methodologies.

One-Size-Fits-All Approach

Risk environments vary significantly between industries, organizations, and even departments within the same organization. Solutions that offer a one-size-fits-all approach may not adequately address the unique risk factors and requirements of different entities. Buyers should seek solutions that are customizable and adaptable to their specific contexts.

Incomplete Data

Risk scoring is only as good as the data that feeds into it. Solutions that rely on incomplete or outdated data can produce misleading scores. Buyers should ensure that the solution integrates with their existing data sources and can incorporate real-time or near-real-time data updates.

Cost vs. Value

While cost is always a consideration, it should be weighed against the value provided by the solution. A lower-cost solution may lack critical features or scalability, while a higher-cost solution may offer more advanced capabilities that justify the investment. Buyers should carefully assess the cost-benefit ratio of each solution.

Compliance and Regulatory Considerations

Different industries have varying compliance and regulatory requirements. Buyers should ensure that the risk-scoring solution is compliant with relevant regulations and standards and that it helps facilitate compliance rather than creating additional challenges.

Scalability

As organizations grow and evolve, their risk management needs can change significantly. Buyers should ensure that the solution they choose is scalable and capable of adapting to future changes in the organization’s size, structure, and risk profile.

Emerging Trends and Future Directions in Cyber Risk Management

As the digital landscape continues to evolve, so do the methodologies and tools for cyber risk scoring. Here are some emerging trends worth knowing about:

1. Integration of AI and Machine Learning

Advanced AI and machine learning algorithms are being increasingly integrated into risk-scoring models to provide more accurate and dynamic assessments. These technologies can analyze vast amounts of data in real-time, identifying patterns and predicting potential threats more effectively than traditional methods.

2. Real-Time Risk Monitoring

The shift towards continuous monitoring and real-time risk assessment allows organizations to respond promptly to emerging threats. This proactive approach enhances an organization’s ability to mitigate risks before they materialize into significant issues.

3. Industry-Specific Risk Models

Developing risk-scoring models tailored to specific industries can provide more relevant and accurate risk assessments. For example, healthcare organizations might focus on risks related to patient data breaches, while financial institutions might prioritize fraud and financial theft risks.

4. Enhanced Collaboration and Information Sharing

Increased collaboration and information sharing among organizations, industry groups, and government agencies can lead to better risk assessment and management practices. Sharing threat intelligence and best practices can help organizations stay ahead of cyber threats.

5. Regulatory Developments and Compliance

As regulatory requirements evolve, so too must risk scoring methodologies. Keeping abreast of changes in regulations and standards ensures that risk assessments remain compliant and relevant.

6. Human Factor Consideration

Incorporating human factors into risk scoring, such as employee behavior and insider threats, provides a more comprehensive view of organizational risk. Understanding the human element can help in developing targeted training and awareness programs to mitigate these risks.

Final Word on Cybersecurity Risk Scores

Let your cyber risk scores guide your path to resilience. Use them to prioritize actions, strengthen defenses, and protect your organization in an ever-changing digital landscape.

Key Takeaways

1. Cyber Risk Scoring Helps You Prioritize

Cyber risk scoring quantifies risks by assessing likelihood and impact, helping you focus on the most critical areas like customer data or public-facing systems.

2. Start with What’s Most Important

 Identify your most valuable assets to prioritize protection:

• Critical services (e.g., customer-facing platforms)
• Sensitive data (e.g., PII, payment details)
• Public-facing systems (e.g., websites)
  

3. Assess Likelihood and Impact

Combine likelihood (how likely an attack is) and impact (financial and operational consequences) to calculate your risk score and identify urgent threats.

4. Understand Asset Value

Know the value of each asset to prioritize:

• Operational importance
• Data sensitivity
• Replacement costs
  

5. Compensating Controls Lower Risk

Implement compensating controls (firewalls, encryption) to reduce the likelihood and impact of risks and make your score more accurate.

The post 9 Methods for Calculating Cybersecurity Risk Scores: A Guide to Risk Analysis appeared first on Centraleyes.

In 2025, companies are evaluating MSSPs the same way they’d vet any other strategic partner: through the lens of alignment, capability, and accountability. 

Questions to Ask When Vetting an MSSP

• How well will they support internal priorities?
• Are they capable of navigating regulatory nuances?
• Can they handle sector-specific complexity? 

Today’s MSSPs are expected to contribute meaningfully to both security and strategy.

That’s why the best managed security service providers are doubling down and differentiating themselves in different areas. Some focus on detection and response. Others are focused on compliance automation or deep vertical expertise in sectors like healthcare, defense, or cloud-native SaaS. AI is in the mix, too, of course — but so are the timeless questions: 

• Do I trust an external team with our data?
• Will they adapt to how we work? Will they grow with us?

The following list reflects these trends. We’re spotlighting 15 MSSP vendors we believe stand out for how they help real teams do real work better. Some are strong fits for defense contractors. Others thrive with agile SaaS teams. A few are building the future of security operations entirely.

If your team is navigating growing risk, increasing complexity, or just looking to simplify the ecosystem with an MSSP, we believe this top MSSP list offers a strong starting point.

Top 15 MSSPs in 2025

1. Orange Cyberdefense

Headquarters: Paris, France
Client Focus: European enterprises, especially regulated sectors
Core Differentiator: Threat-intel driven operations, local regulatory expertise

Orange Cyberdefense operates 18 SOCs and produces proprietary threat intel that fuels its MDR, consulting, and compliance engagements. They support a wide range of sectors across Europe, offering alignment with GDPR, NIS2, and sector-specific obligations.

Why They Made the List: Their strength is in building local trust and delivering enterprise-scale defense with regulatory precision. Ideal for readers dealing with risk and reputation under European mandates.

2. Secure-Centric

Headquarters: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Client Focus: U.S. Defense Industrial Base, aerospace, government contractors
Core Differentiator: CMMC-focused MSSP with advisory and vCISO support

Secure-Centric exists to help organizations navigate the complexity of CMMC, NIST 800-171, and related frameworks. Their services span assessments, remediation, and long-term maturity planning.

Why They Made the List: For our readers supporting national defense supply chains, Secure-Centric offers relevant, no-fluff guidance and auditing tailored to federal certification realities.

3. Neurosoft

Headquarters: Athens, Greece
Client Focus: Telecom, utilities, and infrastructure in Southeast Europe
Core Differentiator: Customized SOC builds, risk-aligned security services

Neurosoft brings enterprise MSSP capability to regional infrastructure and telecom providers. Their solutions are tailored, not templated — built to reflect the operational, regulatory, and business realities of the industries they serve.

Why They Made the List: For readers in transitional markets with layered needs, Neurosoft offers flexible partnerships over generic programs.

4. CY4

Headquarters: Malta
Client Focus: Regulated sectors and fast-scaling SaaS/fintechs
Core Differentiator: Risk-first MSSP with integrated compliance dashboards

CY4 is built for teams navigating both threat detection and framework alignment. Their services link alerts with compliance standards like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, delivering business-friendly intelligence.

Why They Made the List: Because clarity matters. CY4 helps translate security events into the language your board, customers, and auditors understand.

5. BlueVoyant

Headquarters: New York, NY, USA
Client Focus: Enterprises with extended supply chains and compliance scope
Core Differentiator: External threat monitoring + Microsoft-native MDR

BlueVoyant focuses on what happens beyond your firewall — tracking exposed assets and third-party risks across the digital ecosystem. Financial institutions, legal firms, and global brands especially value their services.

Why They Made the List: Readers with high vendor sprawl and attack surface complexity will benefit from BlueVoyant’s external visibility and platform-native speed.

6. Trustwave (SpiderLabs)

Headquarters: Chicago, IL, USA
Client Focus: Finance, healthcare, retail
Core Differentiator: Proprietary threat research and forensic-grade MDR

Trustwave’s SpiderLabs brings original threat intelligence to its MDR services, pairing analytics with response backed by years of incident response work. It’s a go-to for organizations with layered risk across endpoints, data, and identity.

Why They Made the List: Their history in real-world breaches shows in their product. It’s thorough, mature, and trusted by teams who value substance.

7. RSM US LLP

Headquarters: Chicago, IL, USA
Client Focus: Middle-market orgs needing audit-ready security
Core Differentiator: GRC-integrated MSSP built for regulated operations

RSM helps financial firms, healthcare orgs, and nonprofits secure operations while remaining audit-compliant. Their services combine threat management with a strong understanding of SOC 2, HIPAA, and PCI obligations.

Why They Made the List: For readers whose IT and compliance are inextricably linked, RSM offers a rare balance of pragmatism and thoroughness.

8. Arctiq

Headquarters: Toronto, Canada
Client Focus: DevOps-driven orgs and fast-moving tech teams
Core Differentiator: DevSecOps-native MSSP with a focus on CI/CD security

Arctiq specializes in security that moves at code-speed. Their services embed security into infrastructure automation, containers, and cloud-native stacks — not layered on top later.

Why They Made the List: For readers struggling with tool sprawl or lack of alignment between developers and security teams, Arctiq offers cohesion.

9. AgileBlue

Headquarters: Cleveland, OH, USA
Client Focus: Growing SMEs and mid-market orgs
Core Differentiator: AI-driven MDR with ease-of-use and transparency

AgileBlue offers a modern MDR platform that balances affordability, AI insights, and human SOC support. Their platform is ideal for orgs scaling their security program and needing simplicity without compromise.

Why They Made the List: Readers building from the ground up will appreciate how AgileBlue makes strong detection and response attainable.

10. DirectDefense

Headquarters: Englewood, CO, USA
Client Focus: Energy, defense, large-enterprise
Core Differentiator: Offensive security roots with active incident response muscle

Founded by penetration testers, DirectDefense brings an attacker’s perspective to defense. They incorporate red teaming and high-touch containment services into their MDR stack.

Why They Made the List: Their credibility with mature security teams is earned through sharp tools, honest posture assessments, and hands-on help when it counts.

11. MAD Security

Headquarters: Huntsville, AL, USA
Client Focus: Defense contractors, aerospace, DIB entities
Core Differentiator: Military-grade security for highly-regulated orgs

MAD Security’s services are purpose-built for clients handling CUI and seeking CMMC Level 2+ compliance. Their SOC coverage is tailored for high-verification environments and comes with deep policy expertise.

Why They Made the List: Their niche focus helps our readers in defense-heavy industries meet their most pressing risk and compliance goals.

12. Cisco Secure Managed Services

Headquarters: San Jose, CA, USA
Client Focus: Enterprises running Cisco-native infrastructure
Core Differentiator: Stack-integrated MDR and SecureX orchestration

Cisco MSSP partners provide managed services across endpoint, network, and cloud, all tied together through SecureX. The experience is smoothest when clients are already invested in Cisco hardware and platforms.

Why They Made the List: Many of our readers already own Cisco tools. This inclusion is for those looking to get more out of what they have.

13. Accenture Managed Security

Headquarters: Dublin, Ireland
Client Focus: Global orgs mid-transformation
Core Differentiator: Security interwoven into IT and cloud strategy

Accenture’s MSSP offering often rides alongside cloud migration, app modernization, or ERP transformation. That blend of security + business consulting makes them ideal for complex orgs modernizing at scale.

Why They Made the List: Readers tackling both innovation and protection at once will benefit from Accenture’s holistic, integrated approach.

14. SecureWorks (Taegis)

Headquarters: Atlanta, GA, USA
Client Focus: Enterprises needing XDR-native MDR
Core Differentiator: Strong threat intelligence and streamlined detection via Taegis

SecureWorks’ Taegis platform unifies telemetry, guided detection, and high-fidelity alerting. Their Counter Threat Unit provides frequent intel that feeds directly into playbooks.

Why They Made the List: For readers looking to reduce alert fatigue and act faster, Taegis delivers contextualized insight without the noise.

15. High Wire Networks

Headquarters: Batavia, IL, USA
Client Focus: Channel partners, MSPs, and SMB-heavy client bases
Core Differentiator: MSSP-as-a-service model with white-labeled Overwatch platform

High Wire operates behind the scenes for many MSPs and MSSPs, powering their security offerings through its Overwatch platform. What sets them apart is their ability to scale 24/7 threat monitoring and MDR for providers who want to serve multiple clients but lack the infrastructure. Their services are structured, partner-friendly, and highly customizable.

Why They Made the List:
Many readers operate in ecosystems where they serve clients, not just themselves. High Wire helps build security businesses as much as they deliver security itself — a key differentiator in today’s distributed IT economy.

MSSP Providers or Platforms? The Debate

From startups to aerospace contractors, teams are mapping their security and compliance journeys and asking: Who should actually drive this thing?

Let’s break it down.

What MSSPs Bring to the Table

MSSPs offer services, people, and tools — bundled and ready to go. For organizations that need to move quickly, they can provide everything from continuous log monitoring to incident response, threat hunting, and policy enforcement.

For example, if you’re working toward compliance with frameworks like NIST 800-171 or CMMC Level 2, an MSSP can help you enforce multifactor authentication, collect and review system logs, or document your Incident Response Plan. In many cases, they’ve done this dozens of times — and have the processes nailed down.

But it’s not always seamless.

Some MSSPs outsource monitoring to offshore SOCs. That might be fine — or it might clash with your internal policies or contract clauses about foreign nationals accessing Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Others might lock you into their tooling, which works great… until you want to do something your way.

And then there’s the matter of ownership. You might have visibility into incidents, but not always into how they’re triaged. 

What Platforms Promise

Platforms, on the other hand, give you the tools to build your own defense — often automated, often integrated with the systems you already use. They help centralize documentation, assessments, task management, and control tracking.

But there’s a catch: someone has to own it. Platforms don’t run themselves. They need tuning, monitoring, and people who know what they’re doing.

If you’re working with CUI, platforms must be hosted in a compliant environment. That’s a detail not everyone catches, but trust us — your assessors will.

What Smart Teams Are Actually Doing

The reality? Most security-forward organizations aren’t choosing MSSPs or platforms off the shelf. They’re designing hybrid models.

They use platforms to automate, document, and track their internal posture — making audits smoother and reducing overhead. Then they bring in MSSPs to fill the gaps.

Some even rotate — starting with an MSSP to get compliant quickly and then transitioning to a platform once they’ve built up internal muscle. Others keep both: the platform as the brain, the MSSP as the hands and eyes.

Because the best MSSP companies and security setups today are built, not bought. This list of managed security service providers is designed to help you find partners who understand your business, your risks, and your regulatory environment — and who can meet you where you are, technically and strategically.

Cybersecurity isn’t just a service anymore. It’s a structure — one that gets stronger when it’s shaped intentionally. 

The post ​​Top 15 MSSPs to Watch in 2025 appeared first on Centraleyes.

A recent Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) survey found that 70% of organizations have now established dedicated SaaS security teams, signaling how critical this area has become in modern cybersecurity.

Surprisingly, 65% of those same organizations still struggle to manage risks from third-party SaaS integrations, according to the same study. 

Why SaaS Security Deserves a Category of Its Own

SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) applications like Google Workspace, Salesforce, Microsoft 365, and Workday have become the backbone of how modern businesses operate. But unlike regular software that’s installed and controlled on-premises, SaaS apps live in the cloud—outside your network, on infrastructure you don’t own, and shared with thousands of other customers.

SaaS environments differ fundamentally from on-premises setups.

• They’re externally hosted.
• They’re multi-tenant.
• The security model is shared.

That means the responsibility of protecting your data isn’t just your SaaS provider’s job—it’s yours, too.

This architecture introduces new risks—misconfigurations, identity misuse, data leaks, and vulnerabilities introduced via third-party integrations. According to the same CSA survey mentioned above, 25% of organizations experienced a cloud security incident in the last two years, with data breaches accounting for over half of them.

What are SSPMs?

You’ve likely seen SSPM on every “essential SaaS tool” list—and for good reason. It’s the one tool explicitly built to tackle the unique risks of SaaS environments.

So what makes it special?

SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) is a category of security solutions purpose-built for the cloud-first, app-heavy world we live in. Unlike legacy tools that focus on networks or endpoints, SSPM zeroes in on the SaaS apps themselves—constantly monitoring for misconfigurations, excessive permissions, compliance gaps, and third-party integrations that could introduce risk.

Traditional tools like CASBs and SIEMs are great at what they do, but they weren’t designed to continuously monitor SaaS app configurations, flag misaligned permissions, or spot toxic combinations of settings. That’s the domain of SSPM.

Here’s what SSPM brings to the table:

• Scans SaaS apps (like Google Workspace, Salesforce, or Slack) for misconfigurations and policy violations
• Detects over-permissioned users and enforces least privilege
• Provides prebuilt compliance mappings for SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, and more
• Offers continuous SAAS security monitoring —not just point-in-time audits

And it plays well with the rest of your stack. A good SSPM integrates with IAM, DLP, and SIEM to provide unified risk insights and trigger automated remediation workflows.

The Core SaaS Security Stack in 2025

Let’s break down the essential tools modern organizations are using to secure their SaaS environments:

1. SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM)

SSPM continuously monitors your SaaS applications for misconfigurations and compliance issues. Organizations using SSPM are twice as likely to have full visibility into their SaaS stack as those relying on manual audits or legacy tools.

2. Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

CASBs act as a policy enforcement layer between users and cloud services. While still valuable, traditional CASBs alone aren’t enough for today’s dynamic SaaS ecosystems—a point echoed in the CSA survey.

3. Identity and Access Management (IAM)

IAM ensures only the right users can access specific resources, and only when they need to. Features like Single Sign-On (SSO) and Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) are essential for reducing credential-based attacks.

4. Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

DLP monitors how data is shared and accessed across your SaaS applications. It prevents unauthorized data exfiltration—intentional or accidental.

5. Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

SIEM aggregates and analyzes logs from multiple sources (including SaaS application monitoring tools), helping security teams detect unusual patterns and respond to threats in real-time.

6. Endpoint and Extended Detection and Response (EDR/XDR)

While not SaaS-specific, EDR and XDR are critical for detecting attacks that originate on user devices but ultimately target SaaS platforms.

The Third-Party App Dilemma

SaaS security isn’t limited to the app you buy—it includes every third-party plugin, extension, and API you connect to it.

The CSA found that 65% of organizations struggle to track and monitor the risks introduced by third-party apps. Whether it’s a harmless-looking calendar integration or a forgotten sales add-on, each one creates a new entry point for potential attackers.

SAAS security checklist for managing third-party risk:

• Create a standardized vetting and approval process for new integrations.
• Use tools that can continuously monitor third-party connections.
• Implement least-privilege access to limit data exposure.

Selecting the Right SaaS Security Tools: A Practical Guide

Not every company has the same security maturity or budget. Here’s how to choose smartly:

Factor	What to Consider
Company Size & Growth	Startups need lightweight, cost-effective tools. Enterprises need solutions that scale.
Compliance Requirements	Regulated industries (e.g., healthcare, finance) require frameworks like HIPAA, SOC 2, and ISO 27001.
Primary Risk Areas	Focus on the biggest gaps—misconfigurations, access control, insider threats, etc.
Budget vs. ROI	The best tools strike a balance between cost and automation. Overengineering is expensive and risky.

Common SaaS Security Pitfalls (And How to Avoid Them)

1. Misconfigurations

Default settings = easy entry points. SSPM tools can automate misconfiguration detection.

2. Excessive Permissions

Over-permissioned accounts are a breach waiting to happen. Use IAM with least-privilege enforcement.

3. Third-Party Oversight

Shadow IT apps create invisible vulnerabilities. Continuous monitoring and security policies are your allies.

The 12 Best SaaS Security Tools of 2025

Here’s a curated list of top SaaS monitoring tools making waves this year:

1. Centraleyes – Smart Risk and Compliance Management

Managing compliance and risk doesn’t have to be a headache. Centraleyes automates assessments, simplifies compliance, and delivers real-time security insights. Whether you’re tackling SOC 2, ISO 27001, or NIST frameworks, this platform keeps you ahead of security challenges.

2. Netskope – Adaptive SaaS Security

Netskope offers deep visibility into SaaS environments, providing real-time data protection, cloud DLP, and insider threat prevention. Its context-aware policies make it a top-tier choice for businesses needing fine-grained security enforcement.

3. Zscaler – Zero Trust for SaaS Access

Zscaler operates on zero-trust principles, ensuring that only authorized users can access specific SaaS apps. It reduces attack surfaces, detects misconfigurations, and prevents lateral threat movement.

4. BetterCloud – SaaS Security & Management in One

For organizations managing multiple SaaS applications, BetterCloud automates security policies, monitors user activity, and enforces least-privilege access, helping IT teams keep shadow IT under control.

5. Cloudflare Zero Trust – Secure SaaS Access Without VPNs

Cloudflare’s Zero Trust platform eliminates VPNs by applying identity-based security policies. It defends against account takeovers and insider threats, making it ideal for hybrid and remote work environments.

6. AppOmni – SaaS Posture Management Done Right

AppOmni continuously monitors SaaS configurations, excessive permissions, and data exposure risks, making it a must-have for organizations managing multiple SaaS platforms.

7. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps – Native Security for Microsoft 365

For organizations using Microsoft 365, Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless compliance enforcement, AI-driven threat detection, and deep integration with Microsoft’s security ecosystem.

8. IBM Security Verify – AI-Powered Access Control

IBM Security Verify delivers adaptive access controls and AI-driven authentication. It’s a great option for organizations prioritizing identity security.

9. Palo Alto Networks Prisma SaaS – AI-Driven Threat Prevention

Prisma SaaS provides automated security policy enforcement, AI-powered threat detection, and compliance monitoring, making it an excellent choice for businesses securing multiple cloud applications.

10. Lacework – Behavioral Analytics for SaaS Security

Lacework leverages machine learning to detect anomalies, misconfigurations, and threats. For organizations shifting from reactive security to proactive risk prevention, Lacework is a powerful ally.

11. McAfee MVISION Cloud – A Leading CASB Solution

McAfee MVISION Cloud acts as a Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB), offering visibility, data protection, and compliance enforcement. It’s a robust solution for securing sensitive SaaS data.

12. Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker – Preventing Data Breaches

Proofpoint’s CASB solution focuses on real-time monitoring and insider threat protection, helping organizations detect and prevent cloud-based data breaches.

The Next Major SAAS Frontier: Interoperability 

Businesses are signing up for SAAS monitoring tools every minute because of the flexibility and scalability that SaaS provides. 

What’s the big hurdle we’re all looking at as SAAS sprawl grows larger by the day?

In my opinion,  the next frontier will be making sure all these tools actually communicate and work together. Think about it—if you’ve ever had a team that’s full of talented individuals but no one’s on the same page, you know how messy it can get. That’s what happens when security tools are just kinda doing their own thing. We want to make those tools work like a well-oiled machine.

The good news is that things are changing. More and more, we’re seeing SAAS testing tools that are designed to make cloud-based tools work together. 

The future of security is about making things simpler, faster, and more connected. That’s exactly what we’re focusing on at Centraleyes. If you’re ready to take your SaaS security to the next level, we’re here to help you bring it all together.

The post Best 12 SaaS Security Tools to Protect Your Cloud Applications appeared first on Centraleyes.

Last month, the cybersecurity world got a wake-up call: the backbone of global vulnerability tracking—the CVE program—almost collapsed.

On April 15, MITRE revealed that its contract with CISA to run the program hadn’t been renewed, and they had about 36 hours before pulling the plug. Cue widespread panic. Then, with just hours to spare, CISA came through with an 11-month extension. Crisis averted—for now.

But the chaos lit a fire. Within days, a group of CVE insiders announced something big: they’re launching the CVE Foundation, a new, independent nonprofit aimed at fixing what they see as a fragile, outdated setup. Their goal? A more resilient, globally supported system—one not tied to a single government’s checkbook.

Not surprisingly, this ruffled feathers. Former CISA Director Jen Easterly slammed the move, calling it a conflict of interest. In her words, board members shouldn’t be building a rival organization while still governing the current one.

Meanwhile, Europe isn’t waiting around. ENISA dropped its EUVD (European Union Vulnerability Database) earlier this month, and Luxembourg’s CIRCL launched the decentralized GCVE project—both offering new ways to handle vulnerability tracking, minus the U.S. drama.

So here we are. The CVE program lives on—for now—but its near-death experience exposed the cracks. The question isn’t just about who runs it. It’s about whether the whole system needs to evolve. And depending on who you ask, that change is either long overdue—or a risky gamble.

The post CVE Program Gets a Lifeline—But the Real Story Is Just Starting appeared first on Centraleyes.

Privacy is becoming more closely connected to cybersecurity. It makes sense: you can’t govern how data is used if you can’t secure it first. This connection has become impossible to ignore, and more and more regulations like GDPR, CCPA, and LGPD demand accountability for both the security and the privacy of the data you control or manage. 

Yet, managing privacy isn’t straightforward. Different countries, different rules, and different expectations from customers and regulators make it a fragmented landscape. For global organizations, this creates one big question: How do we create a consistent, scalable way to manage privacy risks?

Recognizing this, ISO 27701 was developed as a global privacy standard that helps organizations bridge the gap between cybersecurity and privacy compliance. As the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) describes, it provides “distinctive guidance for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving a privacy information management system for controllers and processors of personal data.” In other words, ISO 27701 meets the growing demand for a framework that integrates privacy governance directly into ISO 27001’s widely adopted information security management system (ISMS)—without reinventing the wheel.

What is ISO 27701?

ISO 27701, officially titled “Security techniques — Extension to ISO/IEC 27001 and 27002 for privacy information management,” is an international standard published in 2019. It extends the well-known ISO 27001 information security framework to include privacy-specific controls and guidance for managing PII.

If there’s nothing else you come out of this blog with, know this: ISO 27701 is not a typo of someone meaning to type “ISO 27001”. But it is closely connected to it. It’s an extension that builds upon ISO 27001 with the goal of integrating privacy into your existing ISMS.

ISO 27701’s Purpose:

• Helps organizations manage privacy risks.
• Provides guidance for both PII controllers and PII processors.
• Maps privacy controls to global regulations like GDPR, CCPA, and others.

This dual focus on security and privacy reflects the reality that data protection isn’t possible without solid cybersecurity foundations.

What is a Privacy Framework, Anyway?

A privacy framework is a structured approach to managing how an organization collects, processes, stores, and shares personal data. It ensures that privacy risks are identified, mitigated, and continuously managed. 

Three Types of Privacy Frameworks:

• Law-specific frameworks: These are tied directly to specific regulations, like GDPR in Europe or CCPA in California. They’re built to ensure you meet the legal requirements in that jurisdiction.
• Industry-neutral frameworks: These frameworks, like the NIST Privacy Framework, offer flexible, risk-based guidance that can be applied across different industries. They aren’t tied to any single regulation but help organizations manage privacy risks according to their own unique environment.
• Integrated cybersecurity-privacy frameworks: This is where ISO 27701 comes in. Instead of starting from scratch, it builds on existing cybersecurity systems—specifically ISO 27001—and adds privacy controls, creating a seamless connection between securing data and governing its use.

ISO 27701 Requirements: The Essentials

The ISO 27701 certification requirements focus on integrating privacy management into your existing information security management system (ISMS). Here’s a clearer breakdown of what’s involved so you know exactly where to start:

1. ISO 27001 Certification as a Prerequisite

You must already be certified in ISO 27001 (or implement it in parallel with ISO 27701).

ISO 27001 provides the foundation for information security, and ISO 27701 builds on this to address privacy.

2. Privacy Information Management System (PIMS)

• Establish a PIMS within your ISMS designed to manage personally identifiable information (PII).
• Identify and define the roles your organization plays: PII controller, PII processor, or both.
• Outline responsibilities, including how you handle data subject rights, breach notifications, and privacy risk assessments.

3. ISO 27701 Controls

ISO 27701 introduces 49 additional controls:

• 31 controls for PII controllers (organizations that determine the purpose and means of processing PII).
• 18 controls for PII processors (organizations that process PII on behalf of a controller).
• These are layered on top of the ISO 27002 security controls, expanding them to include privacy-specific objectives.

For example:

• A security control requiring access management under ISO 27001 is expanded to include privacy considerations—like limiting access to PII based on necessity.
• Incident response plans under ISO 27001 are extended to cover privacy breaches and regulatory reporting obligations.

Mapping Controls to Privacy Laws

ISO 27701 includes annexes mapping its controls to privacy regulations like GDPR and CCPA.

This helps organizations understand how their PIMS aligns with global legal requirements, although certification itself doesn’t guarantee compliance with these laws. Instead, ISO 27701 provides a structured approach to documenting, monitoring, and improving your privacy practices.

Examples of ISO 27701 Controls: Key Privacy Functions

These controls go beyond cybersecurity into privacy-specific activities:

• Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs): Ensure that privacy risks are identified and mitigated when new projects or systems process PII.
• Transparency and Communication: Define how you inform data subjects about how their data is collected, used, and stored.
• Managing Third-Party Processors: Apply due diligence and oversight to vendors handling PII.
• Handling Data Subject Rights: Establish processes for responding to data subject requests (access, correction, deletion, portability).
• Consent Management: Maintain records of consent where applicable and ensure mechanisms are in place to withdraw consent.

These controls often overlap with ISO 27701 cyber security best practices—such as access control, encryption, and breach management—but they’re refined to address privacy nuances.

By integrating these requirements, ISO 27701 helps organizations align their security and privacy efforts, creating a unified framework for protecting PII while meeting diverse regulatory expectations.

ISO 27701 Certification: Steps to Get Certified

1. Baseline with ISO 27001

Ensure your organization has an ISO 27001-certified ISMS. If not, implement it alongside ISO 27701.

2. Conduct a Privacy Gap Assessment

Evaluate your current privacy practices against ISO 27701 requirements. Identify gaps where controls or processes are missing.

3. Implement PIMS Controls

Deploy privacy-specific controls based on your role as a PII controller, processor, or both.

4. Train Your Team

Educate staff on privacy risks, data protection obligations, and compliance processes.

5. Internal Audit and Review

Assess your PIMS and ISMS to ensure readiness for audit and certification.

6. Engage a Certification Body

Work with an accredited certification body to audit and certify your ISO 27701 compliance.

ISO 27701 vs Other Privacy Frameworks: Do You Need More?

This is where things get interesting. ISO 27701 integrates privacy with cybersecurity, but it isn’t the only option. Depending on your regulatory landscape, you might need additional privacy frameworks.

Organizations in highly regulated sectors (e.g., healthcare, finance) or in regions with stringent data protection laws (like the EU) often layer multiple frameworks to cover all bases. While ISO 27701 provides strong foundational privacy controls and integrates with ISO 27001, it doesn’t dictate how to handle specific privacy outcomes or maturity levels.

ISO 27701 vs NIST Privacy Framework:

• ISO 27701 is certifiable and globally recognized, ideal for organizations needing external validation through audits. It’s tightly bound to ISO 27001, making it a strong fit for businesses already focused on cybersecurity and looking to extend into privacy.
• NIST Privacy Framework (PF) is a flexible, risk-based model. It isn’t certifiable but offers guidance on managing privacy risks across different tiers of organizational maturity. It enables companies, especially U.S.-based ones, to tailor privacy programs without the structural overhead of an ISMS.

The key distinction is that ISO 27701 is prescriptive and certifiable, while NIST PF is adaptable and focused on outcomes. This means NIST allows more flexibility in defining what “good privacy management” looks like, whereas ISO 27701 offers a structured pathway tied to globally recognized security practices.

For U.S.-centric companies or those in dynamic industries (like tech or healthcare), NIST PF is often favored for its adaptability. Yet, pairing it with ISO 27701 gives organizations a balanced approach: the certifiable rigor of ISO and the flexible governance of NIST.

ISO 27701 vs GDPR-Specific Frameworks (e.g., BS 10012):

• BS 10012 is a GDPR-centric privacy framework designed as a standalone Personal Information Management System (PIMS). It is well-suited for UK and EU organizations focused solely on GDPR compliance, without the need for a broader ISMS.
• ISO 27701 supports GDPR compliance, but it’s designed to scale globally across multiple privacy regimes. It doesn’t embed specific regulatory timelines (like GDPR’s 72-hour breach notification rule) but provides a structured framework that maps to various laws.

The choice between the two hinges on your scope:

• If you’re operating primarily in the EU or UK and need a streamlined GDPR compliance approach, BS 10012 could suffice.
• If you’re managing global data flows and need to balance cybersecurity with privacy, ISO 27701 offers broader flexibility with international recognition.

Some organizations adopt both, using ISO 27701 as the overarching privacy and security framework and BS 10012 as a GDPR-specific layer.

Should U.S. Organizations Rely on ISO 27701 Alone?

While ISO 27701 privacy controls map to laws like GDPR and CCPA, U.S. companies may face sector-specific requirements. Many adopt ISO 27701 alongside the NIST Privacy Framework to cover both bases: formal certification (ISO) and flexible risk management (NIST).

Common Misconceptions About ISO 27701

1. It’s a Standalone Privacy Framework:

False. It’s an extension of ISO 27001.

2. ISO 27701 Guarantees Legal Compliance:

Not exactly. It provides a framework to manage privacy risks, but regulators judge compliance against laws, not standards.

3. It’s Only for GDPR:

Incorrect. ISO 27701 controls are jurisdiction-neutral and can be mapped to multiple privacy laws globally.

Should You Pursue ISO 27701 Certification?

If you’re already ISO 27001 certified, ISO 27701 is a natural next step to bolster your privacy framework. It offers international recognition, aligns cybersecurity with privacy, and provides assurance to stakeholders. But it may not cover every regulatory nuance.

For many U.S. organizations, combining ISO 27701 with flexible tools like the NIST Privacy Framework offers the best of both worlds: certification and risk management.

Looking to simplify the path to ISO 27701 certification? Use Centraleyes to automate gap assessments, manage ISO 27701 controls, and integrate cybersecurity and privacy workflows seamlessly—all on one platform.

The post ISO 27701 Requirements Explained: How to Enhance Your Privacy Framework appeared first on Centraleyes.

As RSA Conference 2025 just wrapped up, one thing’s clear: AI agents are everywhere—and apparently, they need security guards too.

These digital overachievers are working 24/7, managing networks, analyzing data, and getting things done while we’re all just trying to find a charger. But without proper security, these agents could accidentally leak sensitive information, misuse credentials, or even open the floodgates for hackers to exploit vulnerabilities.

While AI agents are revolutionizing industries, the cybersecurity world is scrambling to figure out how to protect these new digital workers, especially given their ability to operate autonomously. At the RSA Conference 2025, David Bradbury, Chief Security Officer at Okta, summed it up perfectly: “You can’t treat them like a human identity and think that multifactor authentication applies in the same way.”

As AI agents become an increasingly larger part of the workforce, the need for robust security measures has never been more pressing. According to Deloitte, 25% of companies using generative AI are expected to launch agentic AI pilots this year, with that number expected to rise to 50% by 2027. These statistics underscore the rapid expansion of AI’s role and the growing cybersecurity risks associated with it.

The Security Implications of Autonomous AI Agents

The rise of AI agents has already raised significant concerns about security. Without proper guardrails, these agents could inadvertently cause data breaches, misuse login credentials, or leak sensitive information, especially considering their ability to act independently and at speed. For many organizations, their security infrastructure was not built with AI agents in mind. The problem becomes even more complicated as machine identities continue to proliferate across enterprise environments.

CyberArk’s 2025 Identity Security Landscape report reveals that machine identities now outnumber human identities by more than 80 to 1, a stark reminder of just how quickly this shift is happening. As these agents take on more critical tasks, they require as much—if not more—security as human employees.

In fact, experts argue that AI agents need “elevated trust” to ensure they don’t pose a risk. While securing traditional machine-based identities like VPN gateways and file servers is already part of the cybersecurity landscape, AI agents are far more complex. As Jeff Shiner, CEO of 1Password, explains: “An agent acts and reasons, and as a result of that, you need to understand what it’s doing.”

A Call for Immediate Action: Securing AI Agents

As companies rapidly deploy AI agents, security vendors are scrambling to develop solutions that can help manage these new digital employees. At the RSA Conference, security providers such as 1Password, Okta, and OwnID introduced products designed to secure AI identities. These tools aim to provide the necessary protection for AI agents, ensuring that they can carry out their work without compromising an organization’s security.

Proactive security measures will be vital as AI agents take on more responsibility. 

The post Securing AI Agents: A New Frontier in Cybersecurity appeared first on Centraleyes.