I’m very pleased to announce that I have been awarded an ISACA Global Achievement Award, specifically the John W. Lainhart IV Common Body of Knowledge Award. Full citation below:
ISACA John W. Lainhart IV Common Body of Knowledge Award
Scope: Recognizes an individual for major contributions to the development and enhancement of the common body of knowledge used by the ISACA community.
Jack Freund, Ph.D., CISA, CISM, CRISC
“For contributions in developing the CRISC Certification and for ensuring the integrity and quality of the CRISC Certification exam content.”
I’ll be granted this award on 28 May at the ISACA EuroCACS conference in Edinburgh, Scotland.
The full list of this year’s award winners is here.
I’m very proud of the time I’ve spent working on the CRISC certification (almost 8 years now) and it’s astronomical growth since its launch. I truly do believe that it is a very high quality IT risk certification that employers can rely on to ensure that their staff has core IT risk knowledge. I’m very humbled to have my small contributions acknowledged in this way.
I was interviewed for, and quoted in, this ISACA publication around Smart Contracts.
Upon reflection, what we are really seeing is just a continuation of the concept of Code = Law as pointed out by Lawrence Lessig in his 1999 book, Code and Other Law of Cyberspace.
The Smart Contracts doc is a free download (after registration) and can be found here:
In my latest column I wanted to call out some of the dichotomy that exists in the cyber world today. There are so many exciting new technologies in the world, and so much more risk inherent in them. Working in risk means that you can’t avoid bad things entirely (any more than you can stop the future from becoming the present), but you also have to weigh the risk of NOT participating in the latest new technology. And that is what makes working in cybersecurity and risk so interesting!
You can read my thoughts on this here.
My latest @ISACA column was published today and in it, I talk about a concept called “pure risk.” It flies in the face of notions of “positive risk” that are in popular use. Understanding Pure Risk can help dispel any notion that Cyber Risk can be a good thing. You can read it here.
My latest @ISACA article was published today. In it, I focus on the notion of where our authority comes from in Information Security. Too often, in my opinion, we rely on regulation as a source of “why” when articulating control requirements. I think this is dangerous and counter to the very nature of what an effective risk practitioner is.
Take a read and let me know your thoughts!
My latest column for @ISACA was published today. In it I talk about the benefits of using verbal risk labels (things like high, medium, and low) and give some examples where this is helpful in the treatment of Type 1 Diabetes. This is an important concept for those like myself that are dedicated to quantitative risk. Its important to translate the quantitative values into buckets that allow for easy decision making.
You can read more here.
Risk management is all about making forward-looking statements about things that may or may not come to pass. This is also known as forecasting. Read more about this in my latest @ISACA column.