We’ve previously discussed the importance of risk management, and the challenges that come from approaching risk through large-scale frameworks. According to an abstract framework, many organizations aren’t necessarily equipped to mobilize far-ranging risk assessments.
Here, we’ll discuss a compromise to combine the best of both worlds: standards-based risk management.
What is the Difference Between a Risk and Cybersecurity?
When organizations like the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) start promoting risk assessment as a priority, they are addressing a shift in how compliance and security are addressed across enterprises associated with government agencies (or private enterprises) should they adopt recommendations).
Traditionally, compliance involved teams of internal (or external) experts and external (or internal) auditors assessing the existing processes, technologies and software to measure them against existing compliance standards. This is relatively simple–if a given regulation calls for specific security measures and the organization does not implement them, they are not in compliance.
Compliance management, then, became a practice of monitoring regulations and solutions that would adhere to those regulations. The organization would allocate resources to obtain and implement those solutions as needed.
This approach assumes a few things. First, that cybersecurity is reducible to a collection of security controls. However, as we’ve seen in recent years, even seemingly secure systems can become targets of attack due to unexpected vulnerabilities or attack vectors that come with service provider integrations.
Second, it assumes that a series of security controls can meet every organization’s specific needs and challenges that adopt them, no matter the industry.
Many regulatory bodies recognize the limitation of this approach, and some, like NIST, are moving to more risk-oriented models. This, as we’ve covered previously, can come with its own problem, namely that:
- Risk management can become excessively complex for under prepared enterprises.
- Risk management frameworks can prove too abstract to implement effectively.
- Risk management can assume too much expertise on the part of the organization, which can distance them from understanding their actual requirements.
The push to assume organizations use risk to move into understanding their cybersecurity positioning is a good one. Still, it requires some compromise between a more abstract risk management framework that purposely remains standard-agnostic and one grounded in a standards-based approach to assessing risk.
Approaching Compliance-Based Risk Management
The bottom line is that a risk management strategy should lead you to an effective compliance strategy, and if it doesn’t, it isn’t helping your organization properly manage cybersecurity.
However, moving from risk to compliance can prove tricky for a few reasons:
- Bridging the Knowledge Gap: If your enterprise isn’t knowledgeable about risk management strategies or how to implement them, it can be difficult to fully understand what it means to translate risk against actual control implementation.
- Understanding Risk Tolerance: Risk tolerance is the position your organization takes concerning the levels of cybersecurity risks that your organization may take. For example, while a security requirement may call for a specific type of control, it may not define specific levels of complexity, leaving the organization to make decisions based on their needs. This puts the enterprise in a position where they must weigh their business priorities, compliance priorities and obligations to their customers or clients and find the right balance for the company.
- Maintaining Real-Time Compliance: Threats, regulations and technologies change rapidly, and it’s understood that enterprises will be able to respond to those changes as needed. Without a firm grasp on how changes in any of these categories affect the company, you can’t clearly understand where your vulnerable or non-compliant sectors might be.
Compliance by itself doesn’t translate into real operational value, but digging into the weeds of risk management won’t help you completely understand the nuts and bolts of your compliance requirements. That’s why approach risk with an eye toward your compliance framework as the foundation.
What Are the Benefits of Grounding Risk Management in Compliance?
A standards-based approach to risk management can help your organization navigate some complexities of both compliance and risk management by addressing some specific challenges of both disciplines.
Some benefits include the following:
- Providing Clarity Regarding Risk Profile: Using security regulations with a clear picture of what’s expected of your organization can help ground risk assessment in something more understandable and readily scannable. While any compliance regulation isn’t the end-all-be-all of risk management, it can help keep initial risk assessment efforts manageable.
- Supporting Iterative Integration and Scalability: By starting with a compliance baseline, you can better understand how to integrate other company systems and business priorities into your overall risk strategy and then scale out your efforts to encompass them while avoiding data silos.
- Converting Compliance Regulations to Business Value: If you’re working with government agencies or other security-minded companies, compliance is only the starting point of your IT relationship. Almost any trusted partner will be expected to implement security and confidentiality systems that potentially exceed baseline compliance levels. Risk assessment can help you extend your security to address different partnerships and vendor relationships adequately.
The accepted approach to compliance (using risk management to inform comprehensive security strategies) can be reversed by using compliance to provide scaffolding for risk assessments.
Approach Compliance and Risk Management With Lazarus Alliance
Our approach to compliance and risk is, first and foremost, about making sure that both work for your company. We have decades of experience helping companies in the public and private sectors manage their security obligations and risk assessments in ways that speak to their unique needs.
To help integrate compliance standards as a part of the risk management process, Lazarus Alliance uses the Continuum GRC ITAMs platform to help create visualizations of risk as an extension of actual, understandable regulations and compliance standards. This cloud-based platform connects your team with all the information they need to drive productive and scalable risk and security strategies.
Are You Ready to Take the Next Steps in Your Risk and Compliance Journey?
Then work with a company that knows risk assessment, compliance and real security implementation. Work with Lazarus Alliance and the Continuum GRC ITAMs platform.
Call Lazarus Alliance at 1-888-896-7580 or fill in this form.
What Is Autonomous Malware?
We’re reaching the end of 2025, and looking ahead to 2026, most experts are discussing the latest threats that will shape the year ahead. This year, we’re seeing a new, but not unexpected, shift to autonomous threats driven by state-sponsored actors and AI. With that in mind, a new generation of threats, broadly known as...Continue reading→
What CISA’s Emergency Directive 26-01 Means for Everyone
In mid-October 2025, the CISA issued one of its most urgent orders yet: Emergency Directive 26-01. The directive calls on all Federal Civilian Executive Branch (FCEB) agencies to immediately mitigate vulnerabilities in devices from F5 Networks following a state-sponsored breach of F5’s systems and access to portions of BIG-IP source code and vulnerability data. The event...Continue reading→
Cybersecurity and Vetting AI-Powered Tools
A recent exploit involving a new AI-focused browser shone a light on a critical problem–namely, that browser security is a constant issue, and AI is just making that threat more pronounced. Attackers discovered a way to use that browser’s memory features to implant hidden instructions inside an AI assistant. Once stored, those instructions triggered unwanted...Continue reading→
Shutdown Security And Cyber Vulnerability
When the federal government shuts down, the public sees closed monuments, unpaid workers, and halted programs. What they do not see is the silent surge of cyberattacks targeting agencies already operating on fumes. During the most recent shutdown, attacks against U.S. government systems spiked by nearly 85%. Cybersecurity failures during government disruptions rarely start with...Continue reading→
Identity and the Shift from Malware
The world of cyber threats is rapidly evolving, and while we can see these changes more generally, it’s always crucial to understand them concretely. As the 2025 CrowdStrike Global Threat Report shows us, the landscape of our industry is changing. We’re digging into this report to discuss a challenging trend: the move of hackers foregoing...Continue reading→
Maintaining Compliance Against Prompt Injection Attacks
The increasing adoption of AI by businesses introduces security risks that current cybersecurity frameworks are not prepared to address. A particularly complex emerging threat is prompt injection attacks. These attacks manipulate the integrity of large language models and other AI systems, potentially compromising security protocols and legal compliance. Organizations adopting AI must have a plan...Continue reading→
Are We Already Talking About CMMC 3.0?
The ink has barely dried on the CMMC final rule, and already the defense contracting community is buzzing with speculation about what comes next. Just when contractors thought they had a moment to catch their breath after years of regulatory limbo, whispers of CMMC 3.0 have begun circulating through the industry. But is this just...Continue reading→
Centralizing Identity-Based Risk
As the traditional network boundary dissolves and remote work becomes standard practice, identities are the major frontier for security. Whether we’re talking about human users, service accounts, or machine identities, these have emerged as both the primary access mechanism and the most targeted attack vector. It has become imperative for providers to centralize identity management...Continue reading→
Deviation and Significant Change Requests in FedRAMP: A Comprehensive Guide
FedRAMP provides a standardized approach to security assessment, authorization, and continuous monitoring for cloud products and services used by federal agencies. While the program’s rigorous baseline requirements ensure consistent security, the reality is that this consistency calls for a little flexibility. This is where deviation requests and significant change requests come into play. These two...Continue reading→
The Costs of Compliance and Data Breaches
Data is possibly one of the most valuable assets any organization holds. Customer information, employee records, and proprietary business intelligence present challenges because the data flowing through modern enterprises represents both significant opportunities and serious risks. Businesses face a challenging balance: investing in compliance measures to protect sensitive information while also preparing for the real...Continue reading→
Related Posts