Compare compliance and risk management, including how they are similar but ultimately different, and learn important best practices for unifying these strategies.

A robust security strategy is no longer a nice-to-have. It's essential to remain competitive and trustworthy in the market. Security teams are under constant pressure to quickly address vulnerabilities and maintain compliance, all while scaling business operations.

Web Pixel Privacy Risks and Mitigation Strategies are crucial topics for businesses today. In the previous posts, we explored the world of web pixels, uncovering potential privacy risks and highlighting the importance of a thorough audit. Now, let’s shift our focus to actionable strategies for mitigating these risks and ensuring your web pixel usage is both effective and ethical.

You don’t control most of the code in your software. Unfortunately, that’s the reality of today. Open-source libraries, third-party components, and vendor integrations make up the bulk of most modern applications because they save time and resources, allowing you to build on existing frameworks rather than reinvent the wheel. But with every supply chain component, you’re opening a potential doorway for attackers to exploit.

In Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM), risk assessment acts as the central thread that ties all components together, turning raw threat intelligence, vulnerability detection, and external attack surface monitoring into actionable mitigation strategies.

India's Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) law, enacted in 2023, represents a pivotal step in safeguarding personal data privacy while fostering accountability among entities handling such data. As businesses grapple with its requirements, understanding its core mandates, applicability, timeline, and implications is critical for compliance and operational efficiency.

It’s 10:47 PM, and I’m halfway through binge-watching the latest must-see series when my phone buzzes. A notification from SecurityScorecard has my attention instantly: one of our critical vendors has just reported a breach. I hit pause, grab my laptop, and dive straight in. As much as I’d love to ignore it for a few hours, cyber risks don’t come with snooze buttons. Before panic sets in, I’m logging into the SecurityScorecard platform.

While vulnerability management is one of the few preventative practices in security, vulnerability patching is still a reactive process. It’s a continuous cycle of discovery, vendors releasing patches, and remediation teams applying those patches. What if there was a way to build in some proactivity to this endless reactive spiral?

In the cyber security domain, the increase of cyber-attacks alongside the acceleration of businesses’ digital transformation, drive states to deploy a more ringent regulatory framework to protect data and establish a code of conduct for businesses. In this perspective, it is essential to view compliance as an integral component of the wider governance framework, which is grounded in international standards of an interconnected world that makes best use of already tested best practices.

In the spring of 2024, amid growing international concern about supply chain risk and the trust and reliability of technology suppliers, the United States banned Kaspersky Lab, Inc., the Russia-based antivirus company from providing its products to the US market. The ban went into effect on September 30, 2024. What impact has the ban had on US and global usage of Kaspersky? Has it been effective? A new analysis from Bitsight contains some surprising results.