Your auditor wants a documented risk assessment, your cyber insurer wants answers, and your board wants to know which risks matter and what they could cost. A cybersecurity risk assessment gives you one defensible picture of your assets, threats, likelihood, impact and treatment decisions that every one of those people can read, and that your team can actually use to run security.
A cybersecurity risk assessment identifies what you need to protect, what could go wrong with it, how likely that is and how much it would hurt, then records each risk, who owns it and what you have decided to do about it. Done well, it is the document that explains every other security decision you make: why this control and not that one, why this budget, why this risk was accepted rather than fixed. NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1 and ISO/IEC 27005 describe the discipline; NIST CSF 2.0 places it in the Govern and Identify functions, beside your risk management strategy and risk appetite.
Almost every framework you will meet asks for one. The HIPAA Security Rule requires an accurate and thorough risk analysis of electronic protected health information. ISO/IEC 27001 makes risk assessment and risk treatment the engine of the whole management system. SOC 2’s CC3 criteria expect you to identify and analyze risk, consider fraud and assess significant change. PCI DSS v4 asks for targeted risk analyses wherever you set your own control frequency. The GLBA Safeguards Rule and NYDFS Part 500 require written risk assessments, CMMC and NIST SP 800-171 carry a dedicated risk assessment family, and cyber insurers, investors and public-company disclosure rules increasingly ask how you identify and oversee material cyber risk.
Organizations usually come to this work after a risk assessment let them down: a spreadsheet of generic threats nobody revisited, ratings nobody could defend, or a heat map that told the board everything was “medium”. You get a risk assessment built on your actual systems, data and vendors, scored with a method you can repeat, and written so that a security engineer, an auditor and a director each find the answer they need.
SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS or CMMC is on your calendar, and the risk assessment is the artifact you know is weakest. You need one that answers the assessor’s questions and links each risk to the controls you chose.
Your directors ask which cyber risks could hurt the business, by how much, and whether the security budget is going to the right place. You need a register that rolls up into a short, honest story with appetite, trends and decisions they can take.
The GLBA Safeguards Rule, NYDFS Part 500 or the HIPAA Security Rule requires a written risk assessment, and an examiner or investigator may ask to see it. You need one that is specific to your systems and kept current.
An acquisition, a cloud migration, a new product line or an incident has made last year’s assessment obsolete. You need a fresh baseline that reflects how the business runs today.
No certificate — the result is your own risk register and treatment plan
A documented, repeatable risk assessment of the kind HIPAA, ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, CMMC, the GLBA Safeguards Rule and NYDFS Part 500 each expect to see
No body certifies a risk assessment. The auditor, assessor, examiner or insurer you deal with reviews it as evidence of your own process, and readiness gives you one built to stand up to that review.
A written method covering scales, criteria, roles and the events that trigger reassessment, consistent with ISO/IEC 27001 clause 6.1.2 and NIST SP 800-30, so your next assessment produces comparable results.
The systems, data and processes in scope, with owners and classification, structured so your team can keep it current as the environment changes.
Every identified risk with its threat, vulnerability, likelihood, impact, inherent and residual rating, owner and treatment decision, in a form your GRC tool or spreadsheet can carry forward.
Prioritized actions for the risks above your tolerance, the controls each action strengthens and who owns it, plus risk acceptances signed by the people with authority to accept them.
Draft appetite and tolerance language for leadership to approve, so “acceptable risk” becomes a decision your organization made rather than a guess.
A short narrative for directors: the top risks, how they have moved, what is being done about them and which decisions need the board.
Each risk and treatment mapped to HIPAA, ISO/IEC 27001 Annex A, SOC 2 CC3, PCI DSS, NIST SP 800-171 or CSF 2.0, so one assessment serves several audits.
For the few risks that drive big decisions, Open FAIR loss-exposure ranges you can set beside insurance limits and budget requests.
Better found now, by people on your side, than by your assessor.
A risk assessment that lists generic threats but never names the organization’s own systems or data
Likelihood and impact scores with no defined scale, so two people rate the same risk differently
No distinction between inherent and residual risk, which hides what each control is worth
Risks accepted informally, with no owner, rationale or approval from someone with authority
An assessment that is not revisited after major change such as a migration, acquisition or new product
No stated risk appetite, so nobody can say which risks are acceptable
Third-party and cloud-provider risks left out because the systems are not “ours”
A treatment plan disconnected from the register, so completed actions never change a rating
Feeds the risk assessment real vulnerability data across your estate instead of assumed weaknesses, supporting the vulnerability identification that NIST SP 800-30 and the NIST SP 800-171 risk assessment family call for.
What the test coversShows what an outside attacker can actually reach and exploit, which is the evidence behind the likelihood ratings for your internet-facing risks.
What the test coversShows how far an attacker or a compromised account can move once inside, informing impact ratings and the real value of segmentation and identity controls.
What the test coversExamines the cloud accounts where much of your sensitive data now lives, so misconfiguration risk is measured rather than guessed.
What the test coversValidates the risks in the applications that hold customer data and gives auditors independent evidence that the related controls work.
What the test coversNo. A scan or penetration test finds technical weaknesses in specific systems. A risk assessment asks which of the things that could go wrong matter most to the business, across people, process, technology and vendors, and records what you will do about each. Test results are valuable input: they turn assumed vulnerabilities into observed ones and make your likelihood ratings defensible.
NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1 is the most widely used US reference and fits HIPAA, NIST SP 800-171 and CMMC well. ISO/IEC 27005 aligns naturally with an ISO/IEC 27001 management system. NIST CSF 2.0 frames the governance around both. You do not have to pick only one: a single documented method can satisfy several frameworks, and your auditor can see exactly how it maps.
Yes. The HIPAA Security Rule requires covered entities and business associates to conduct an accurate and thorough assessment of the potential risks and vulnerabilities to the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic protected health information, and to manage those risks. HHS has repeatedly cited missing or inadequate risk analyses in its enforcement actions. A checklist of Security Rule safeguards is not, on its own, a risk analysis.
Most organizations need a sound qualitative or semi-quantitative register for breadth and quantitative analysis for depth on a few risks. Open FAIR expresses risk as ranges of probable loss event frequency and loss magnitude, which helps when you are weighing insurance limits, a major investment or a board question about exposure. Quantifying every line of the register rarely repays the effort.
Most frameworks expect a review at least annually and whenever something significant changes: a new system, an acquisition, a move to a new cloud provider, a serious incident or a new regulatory obligation. ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2 and NYDFS Part 500 all expect the assessment to be kept current, so the methodology you receive names the events that should trigger a fresh look.
Your auditor or assessor decides what to accept, and they will evaluate the assessment as your organization’s own work, because it is. You own the register, approve the method and sign the risk acceptances. CyberlySecure helps you build something specific, consistent and traceable but does not audit it or sign off on it, which preserves the independence your auditor needs.
A short report in business language: the handful of risks that could materially affect the organization, how each has moved, what is being done, which risks leadership has accepted and the decisions directors are asked to make. It also helps you describe your risk management process and board oversight where SEC disclosure rules, investors or insurers ask for it.
One conversation with someone who does this work. You leave knowing where you likely stand and what readiness would involve for you.
Not sure where to start? One of our testers reviews your internet-facing footprint and sends you a short summary of what an attacker would see — free. Nothing you don’t own is ever touched, and there’s no sales sequence.
Free. No obligation.
