Latest Articles

The CISO Role Is Evolving — From Oversight to Orchestration of AI-Driven Risk Management The Role Transformation The role of the CISO is evolving from oversight to orchestration. Rather than managing discrete controls and compliance processes, CISOs increasingly oversee AI-driven systems that automate risk management processes across the enterprise . What's Driving the Change 1. Connected GRC Cyber risk no longer exists in isolation. It is deeply interconnected with third-party risk, operational risk, regulatory risk, and enterprise resilience. CISOs are adopting connected GRC platforms that provide holistic visibility across risk domains . 2. AI-First GRC AI is becoming a core capability for CISOs. Predictive intelligence, automated controls testing, and real-time risk insights allow security and risk teams to anticipate threats before they materialize . 3. Regulatory Scrutiny Board expectations, regulatory requirements, and audit standards are elevating the importance of SGR (Security, Governance, and Risk) . The New CISO Responsibilities Risk Orchestration Not just managing controls, but orchestrating AI-driven systems that automate risk management . AI Governance Ensuring AI systems are governed effectively, with clear accountability structures, risk assessments for AI use cases, and controls aligned to emerging regulations . Board Communication Communicating risk in business terms, not technical terms. Demonstrating how risk management supports business objectives. Strategic Partnership Aligning security and risk with business strategy. Showing how risk management enables innovation. Key CISO Takeaways Avasant highlights key takeaways for CISOs : Move from audit readiness to continuous assurance. Leading enterprises are collapsing audit cycles into always-on validation. Prioritize platforms over point solutions. Move away from fragmented point solutions toward unified, AI-enabled GRC platforms. Shift focus from detection to orchestration. The true value of agentic AI lies in autonomous execution—enabling systems not only to identify risks but also to initiate remediation. The Skills Gap Traditional CISO Skills New CISO Skills Technical security Business acumen Incident response Risk orchestration Control management AI governance Compliance Strategic partnership Conclusion The CISO role is evolving from oversight to orchestration. Organizations that prepare their CISOs for this evolution—with new skills, new tools, and new expectations—will be better positioned for effective risk management in the AI era. Action Items for Your Organization Assess your CISO's current role Define the future CISO role Develop new skills (business acumen, AI governance) Adopt connected GRC platforms Support the evolution from oversight to orchestration

Headline: If Your Controls Aren't Modern, Your GRC Program Isn't Either — Modernization for 2026 The Modernization Imperative With the emergence of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), organizations have a unique opportunity to rethink their approach—eliminating waste, enhancing effectiveness, and delivering real value from controls while doing more with less . Why act now: Reduce cost pressures by eliminating duplication and low-value controls  Meet evolving regulatory expectations with proportionate, risk-based controls  Improve agility with leaner control environments  Strengthen accountability as heightened focus on director duties means ineffective controls can lead to personal liability  The Modernization Framework 1. Diagnose and Prioritize Assess the current control landscape to identify duplication, inefficiency, and manual effort. Focus on controls that are needed to meet regulatory obligations and/or address the most significant risks . Key questions: Which controls are redundant? Which controls are misaligned with actual risk? Which controls are inefficient? Which controls are manual? Which controls have gaps? 2. Benchmark and Rationalize Compare practices against peers and regulatory standards. Consolidate and streamline controls to close gaps and prioritize effectively . Rationalization actions: Eliminate redundant controls Consolidate overlapping controls Automate manual controls Redesign ineffective controls Add controls for identified gaps 3. Automate and Modernize Leverage data, automation, and AI to enhance monitoring, testing, and reporting. Embed smarter oversight and enable continuous improvement . Modernization capabilities: Continuous controls monitoring Automated control assessments AI-powered anomaly detection Real-time risk visibility Intelligent automation 4. Strengthen Governance Clarify ownership and accountability, align controls to legal duties, and ensure they remain defensible and agile . Governance enhancements: Clear control ownership Documented control processes Regular control reviews Exception management Accountability structures The Controls Modernization Opportunity The challenge: For most organizations, the internal control environment has grown organically over time, often as a result of overlapping, manual, or outdated controls . The opportunity: With emerging technologies such as AI, organizations can eliminate waste, enhance effectiveness, and deliver real value from controls . Controls Modernization and GRC Platforms The GRC platform market is shifting toward targeted solutions. Some 64% of respondents said they would rather use targeted agentic AI systems than broad all-in-one platforms. That share rose to 70% among buyers focused on risk . The message: Buyers aren't waiting for the next generation of tools. They've moved their money toward agents that can prove specific, repeatable, and defensible outcomes. Conclusion Controls modernization is essential for effective GRC in 2026. Organizations that modernize their controls—rationalizing, automating, and strengthening governance—will reduce costs, improve assurance, and meet evolving regulatory expectations. Action Items for Your Organization Assess your current control environment Identify duplication and inefficiency Prioritize controls for modernization Rationalize overlapping controls Automate manual controls Strengthen governance and ownership Measure the impact of modernization  

Six Types of Vendor Risk — Understanding the Full Spectrum of Third-Party Exposure The Risk Spectrum Organizations face various risks when engaging with third-party vendors. Understanding these different risk categories is essential for developing a VRM strategy . 1. Cybersecurity Risk Definition: Cybersecurity risk refers to the impact of a cyber attack against a vendor. This increasingly critical risk category encompasses performance degradation or loss of important information from data breaches . Why it matters: Third-party vendors with poor security practices pose a huge risk—regardless of an organization's internal security controls. A threat actor exploiting a vendor's weak cybersecurity eventually accesses an organization's sensitive data . Examples: Target's 2013 data breach resulting from a compromised third-party vendor exposed over 40 million credit card details . The SolarWinds hack of 2020 infiltrated and severely compromised the Orion IT monitoring platform and many of its users . 2. Operational Risk Definition: Operational risk involves disruptions to an organization's workflow caused by partial or complete halts in vendor services. These disruptions typically arise from issues within the vendor's internal processes, staff turnover or drops in service quality . Why it matters: A vendor's operational failures directly impact an associated organization's ability to serve its customers, meet deadlines and maintain quality standards . Examples: Delivery delays, cloud computing reliability issues, and business continuity failures . 3. Financial Risk Definition: Financial risks emerge when vendors cannot perform as stated in a contract, when they face insolvency issues or if they suddenly go out of business . Why it matters: A third-party vendor's financial instability often precedes increased costs, lost revenue, service disruptions and even sudden termination of critical services . Examples: Vendor bankruptcy, contractual non-performance, sudden price increases. 4. Compliance and Regulatory Risk Definition: These risks arise when vendors fail to meet regulatory requirements that extend to an organization through their relationship. Different industries have specific compliance requirements applying to vendors handling certain types of data or providing particular services . Why it matters: If a vendor is breached and loses personally identifiable information, the law clearly states the organization is responsible, not its vendor . Examples: HIPAA violations in healthcare, PCI DSS breaches in retail, GDPR non-compliance in any sector . 5. Reputational Risk Definition: Reputational risk involves damage to an organization's public image resulting from a vendor's actions or failures . Why it matters: Third-party vendors harm a company's reputation through careless handling of sensitive data, interactions that don't meet that company's standards or their own public scandals . Examples: Negative publicity surrounding a key vendor, unethical practices, association with controversial entities. 6. Geopolitical Risk Definition: Geopolitical risk affects vendor operations based on geographic location, political climate, sanctions vulnerability, and dependencies on other high-risk third parties . Why it matters: Sanctions, tariff wars and trade tensions wield stronger influence on CIOs' decisions around how they assess their vendors, draw up contracts and conduct audits . Examples: Microsoft's suspension of cloud services following EU sanctions on Russia affecting Nayara Energy . Hidden risks where a company may appear operating solely within one jurisdiction but has a parent company or key investors subjected to regulations from a different country . The Fourth-Party Challenge Sub-tier vendor activities, known as fourth-party or nth-party risks, are harder to monitor without adequate technological interventions . A vendor's security practices may be sound, but their subcontractors may introduce significant vulnerabilities. Understanding inter- and intra-dependent activities (including those of subcontractors or sub-processors) is a significant facet of the vendor supply chain . Conclusion Understanding the different types of risks associated with third-party vendors is essential for an effective vendor risk management framework . Organizations should assess vendors across all risk categories to gain a complete picture of exposure. Action Items for Your Organization Map vendor risks across all six categories Identify gaps in current risk assessments Prioritize risks based on potential business impact Assess fourth-party and nth-party risks Document risk findings in your VRM program  

The AI GRC Tool Gap — Why 86% of Teams Say AI Compliance Products Aren't Enterprise-Ready The Tooling Problem Despite the rapid adoption of AI for GRC, the tools themselves are falling short. Drata's research found that 86% of teams agreed that many AI products aimed at governance, risk, and compliance are not ready for large organizations . Organizations are becoming less patient with products that do not work as expected. Three-quarters of organizations said they now stop using underperforming AI tools more quickly than before, and more than half said they return to manual processes when those tools fall short . What's Wrong with Current AI GRC Tools? Limited Visibility The tools aren't providing the visibility needed. With 87% of organizations lacking full visibility into AI tools, the tools meant to provide governance aren't delivering . Incomplete Readiness 83% of respondents said they were not fully prepared for the next wave of AI integration . The tools are moving faster than organizations can adopt them. Poor Fit for Enterprise Needs 86% of teams say AI GRC products are not ready for large organizations. The features may work for smaller organizations but don't scale. The AI GRC Adoption Gap Challenge Percentage Organizations without full AI visibility 87% Teams saying AI GRC products aren't enterprise-ready 86% Organizations not prepared for next AI wave 83% Organizations abandoning underperforming AI tools quickly 75% The Buyer Shift Some 64% of respondents said they would rather use targeted agentic AI systems than broad all-in-one platforms . This shift suggests organizations are moving away from monolithic GRC platforms toward specialized AI agents that deliver specific, measurable outcomes. The Performance Problem 90% of respondents said at least some AI investments had fallen short of expectations . While the study did not break down these disappointments in detail, the broader results suggest that weak oversight, unclear ownership, and limited readiness remain major barriers. What Organizations Are Doing About It Organizations are returning to manual processes when tools fail—more than half said they return to manual processes when AI tools fall short . This suggests that AI GRC tools are not yet reliable enough to fully replace manual workflows. Conclusion The AI GRC tool market is still maturing. Organizations should approach AI GRC tools with clear expectations, start with pilots, and maintain manual fallback processes. The next decade in GRC will belong to organizations that buy, build, deploy, fine-tune, and benefit from agents that own specific outcomes and hold vendors accountable when those outcomes fail . Action Items for Your Organization Evaluate AI GRC tools carefully before purchasing Start with pilots for specific use cases Maintain manual processes as a fallback Hold vendors accountable for outcomes Measure AI GRC tool performance rigorously    

AI Risk Is No Longer Theoretical — Use AI Agents to Scale Your TPRM Program The AI Opportunity in VRM AI risk is no longer theoretical—it's an immediate, critical organizational problem . As much as AI is the source of this challenge, it is also the solution . AI and automation represent transformative tools that optimize efficiency and visibility in risk processes . What AI Can Do in VRM Capability Description Automated vendor discovery Identify vendors across the organization without manual effort Evidence analysis Analyze SOC reports, penetration tests, audit certifications, and public pages  Risk scoring Assess vendors against industry-specific risks  Sanctions monitoring Real-time identification of sanctioned individuals or entities  Contract analysis Extract clauses and flag deviations faster than manual methods  Continuous monitoring Real-time alerts for control gaps and breaches  The "Heavy Lift" Approach The most practical AI guidance is simple: use AI where it accelerates analysis, consistency, and scale—but don't outsource the actual risk decision . AI's role in VRM: Automate the "heavy lift" work of gathering and analyzing data Compare all findings to a baseline of controls Ensure all vendors are assessed in the same terms Scale coverage without scaling headcount  Human's role in VRM: Keep the judgment and accountability Make accept/avoid/mitigate decisions Apply governance and oversight  AI Governance in VRM If you use AI, you need monitoring for drift, hallucinations, and traceable evidence . AI does tend to hallucinate and it will make things up . Governance requirements: Dig into citations and sources Spot check AI outputs "Babysit" models Provide provenance and controls around the AI workflow  As one practitioner noted: "Use AI for sure but please provide governance and oversight. Don't trust this thing to tell you what's going on in your organization, specifically your risk and your mission statement" . The Agentic AI Opportunity Agentic AI can be deployed throughout the vendor lifecycle to automate time-consuming manual processes . Specific use cases include: Identifying duplicate vendors Segmenting third-party criticality Automating approvals and rejections Evaluating SLAs Reducing false positives from inbound adverse news  The Vendor AI Risk Challenge AI systems are inherently different from traditional technology. They are dynamic, adaptive, and opaque, introducing new risks like model bias, data governance gaps, and compliance failures . The far wider and faster-moving threat is in the supply chain. It seems like every vendor, from HR platforms to code repositories, is using AI. And that extends risk far beyond traditional attack surfaces . The advice: "Every vendor is now an AI vendor, knowingly or not. Visibility is the first defense. Map AI across your ecosystem, verify vendor claims with evidence, and apply governance proportional to the risk" . Conclusion AI is transforming VRM from a manual, resource-intensive process into a scalable, automated capability. Organizations that use AI for the "heavy lift" while keeping human judgment and accountability will achieve greater coverage and efficiency . Action Items for Your Organization Identify VRM processes that can be automated with AI Implement AI-powered vendor discovery and monitoring Use AI to analyze vendor evidence and documentation Establish governance for AI-driven VRM processes Monitor AI outputs for drift and hallucinations  

AI Systems Are the Fastest-Growing Risk — 87% of Organizations See AI Vulnerabilities as Top Cyber Risk The AI Risk Imperative The WEF Global Cybersecurity Outlook 2026 highlighted that 87% of respondents identified AI-related vulnerabilities as the fastest-growing cyber risk . As enterprises accelerate AI adoption, AI systems themselves are becoming a major source of cyber and operational risk. Issues around data integrity, model security, bias, explainability, and regulatory compliance are now front and center . The AI Governance Framework To govern AI effectively, organizations need a structured approach across the AI value chain : 1. Discover: Establish Visibility The starting point is full visibility. Organizations must establish a comprehensive view of all AI assets across the enterprise, including models, datasets, and agents . 2. Classify: Implement Risk-Based Classification Once visibility is established, organizations must implement risk-based classification frameworks aligned with emerging regulations such as the EU AI Act. This involves assessing AI systems by risk tier and evaluating attributes such as fairness, bias, and explainability . 3. Monitor: Continuous Oversight AI models are inherently dynamic, requiring real-time monitoring for drift, bias, and performance degradation. This ensures AI systems remain trustworthy throughout their lifecycle . 4. Control: Enforce Runtime Guardrails CISOs must enforce runtime controls and guardrails to manage AI behavior in production environments. These controls prevent unsafe outputs, enforce organizational policies, and trigger remediation workflows . Key AI Governance Questions As AI governance becomes a core pillar of cyber resilience, organizations need clear accountability structures, risk assessments for AI use cases, and controls aligned to emerging regulations and ethical standards . Critical questions for every AI deployment: What data is used to train the model? How are decisions explained and justified? Who is accountable for AI decisions? How is bias monitored and mitigated? What happens when the model fails? The AI Incident Challenge AI incidents are different from traditional incidents. They require dedicated governance : Incident Type Description AI exposure of sensitive data AI system leaks confidential information Unauthorized AI action AI agent takes action without approval Discriminatory outputs Model generates biased or non-compliant outputs AI compliance failures AI produces inaccurate compliance artifacts AI model drift Model behaves differently after update Conclusion Without robust governance, AI can amplify risk faster than traditional systems. With it, AI becomes a powerful enabler of secure, resilient, and responsible innovation . Organizations need to build AI governance as a core capability, not an afterthought. Action Items for Your Organization Establish a centralized AI inventory Implement risk-based AI classification Define AI incident response playbooks Assign accountability for AI governance Monitor AI for drift and bias Prepare for EU AI Act compliance (August 2026 deadline)