Introduction to Gap Assessments
Welcome to Framework, a podcast from Bare
Metal Cyber. I'm Doctor Jason Edwards, a
cyber professional, adjunct instructor
and course developer. As always, thanks
for listening, and if you could, please
like, share and review this episode and
podcast. And For more information on the
NIST Cybersecurity Framework, visit
baremetalcyber.com and check out my
books, including a best-selling
comprehensive guide to the NIST CSF
2.0. Today's topic
is an introduction to gap assessments.
A gap assessment is a critical process in
cybersecurity that evaluates the
effectiveness of an organization's
security controls by identifying
weaknesses. Misconfigurations and areas
for improvement. These assessments
provide organizations with a structured
approach to measuring their security
posture, helping them determine whether
existing controls align with industry
best practices, regulatory requirements,
and risk management objectives. Without a
clear understanding of security gaps,
organizations risk overlooking
vulnerabilities that could be exploited
by attackers, leading to potential data
breaches, financial losses, or compliance
violations by systematically assessing
security gaps. Organizations can
strengthen their defenses, enhance
resilience, and prioritize investments in
cybersecurity improvements. Gap
assessments play a crucial role in
helping organizations align cybersecurity
controls with security frameworks and
regulatory mandates. They provide
visibility into an organization's
security strengths and weaknesses,
allowing leadership teams to make
informed decisions on resource
allocation. Policy development and risk
mitigation strategies. Many industries
require strict adherence to cybersecurity
regulations, including the General Data
Protection Regulation, the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act, and the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification. A gap assessment helps
organizations determine whether they meet
these compliance standards or need to
implement additional security measures.
Additionally, gap assessments are
valuable for organizations seeking to
align with risk management frameworks.
Such as NIST 800-53
or ISO 27001.
Within the NIST Cybersecurity Framework
2.0, GAP assessments help organizations
evaluate their security posture across
the six core functions, govern, identify,
protect, detect, respond, and recover. By
identifying gaps within these areas,
organizations gain insights into where
security controls need to be strengthened
to improve overall risk management. The
Govern function assesses whether
organizations have clear security
policies, leadership accountability, and
governance structures in place. The
Identify function evaluates an
organization's ability to track assets,
manage vulnerabilities, and understand
cyber risks. The Protect function
focuses on preventive security controls,
while the Detect function ensures that
monitoring and alerting systems are
effective in identifying security
threats. The Respond and Recover
functions assess an organization's
capability to mitigate and recover from
cybersecurity incidents efficiently.
Conducting a structured gap assessment
within CSF 2.0 allows
organizations to address security
weaknesses in a methodical way, ensuring
continuous cybersecurity improvement. A
cybersecurity gap assessment serves as a
foundational tool for organizations
looking to align their security controls
with business objectives, regulatory
requirements, and risk management
strategies. Cyber threats continue to
evolve, and organizations must regularly
evaluate their security posture to ensure
their controls remain effective against
emerging risks. A gap assessment provides
a structured approach to identifying
security deficiencies, allowing
organizations to prioritize improvements
based on the severity of potential
threats. By conducting regular
assessments, businesses can proactively
address security weaknesses rather than
reacting to incidents after they occur.
Without a clear understanding of where
gaps exist, organizations risk
misallocating resources, leaving critical
systems unprotected, and failing to
comply with industry regulations. One of
the most valuable aspects of a gap
assessment is the visibility it provides
into an organization's current
cybersecurity posture. Many organizations
assume their security measures are
sufficient. Until a cyber attack or audit
exposes vulnerabilities, a gap
assessment helps security teams and
executives understand exactly where
security measures are strong and where
improvements are needed. By identifying
control weaknesses, organizations can
make data-driven decisions on security
investments, workforce training, and
technology upgrades. This visibility also
enables leadership to justify
cybersecurity spending to stakeholders,
ensuring that security budgets are
allocated to the most critical areas of
risk reduction. Beyond internal risk
management, gap assessments are essential
for ensuring compliance with regulatory
frameworks. Many industries, including
finance, healthcare, and defense
contracting, must adhere to strict
cybersecurity standards, such as the
General Data Protection Regulation, the
Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act, and the Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification. A gap
assessment evaluates whether an
organization's current security controls
meet regulatory requirements or if
corrective actions are needed to achieve
compliance. By identifying security
gaps before an external audit,
organizations can avoid costly penalties,
reputational damage, and potential legal
consequences. Additionally,
compliance-driven gap assessments help
organizations streamline audit
preparation, reducing the time and effort
required to demonstrate security
effectiveness to regulators and business
partners. Conducting a gap assessment
involves A structured process that allows
organizations to evaluate their existing
security controls. Compare them against
industry standards and identify areas for
improvement. A well executed gap
assessment provides a clear road map for
strengthening cybersecurity defenses and
aligning security practices with business
objectives. While the exact methodology
may vary depending on an organization's
industry, size, and regulatory
requirements, the core steps remain
consistent and ensure a thorough
evaluation of security gaps. The
first step in a cybersecurity gap
assessment is defining its scope, which
includes identifying critical assets,
evaluating business processes, and
aligning the assessment with a specific
cybersecurity framework or regulatory
requirement. Organizations must determine
which systems, networks, and applications
will be evaluated and whether the
assessment will focus on a specific
function such as access control or
incident response. Or a broader
organizational security review. The scope
should also consider internal policies,
third party vendors, and compliance
mandates, ensuring that the assessment
provides comprehensive coverage of
potential security weaknesses. Once the
scope is established, organizations must
evaluate their existing security controls
to determine whether they effectively
mitigate cyber risks. This includes
reviewing technical controls such as
firewalls, encryption, and multifactor
authentication. As well as administrative
controls, including security policies,
training programs, and governance
structures. Security teams analyze
whether controls are properly
implemented, consistently enforced, and
aligned with security best practices. In
many cases, organizations discover that
security policies exist but are not
consistently followed, leaving them
vulnerable to threats despite having
documented guidelines. Identifying these
enforcement gaps is essential for
improving security maturity and ensuring
that security measures provide real
protection. A key component of a gap
assessment is conducting a risk
assessment, which helps organizations
identify potential threats,
vulnerabilities, and the impact of a
security breach. This step involves
evaluating which assets are most at risk,
what attack vectors could be exploited,
and how an incident could affect business
operations. Risk assessments use
methodologies such as quantitative risk
scoring or qualitative impact analysis to
determine which security gaps pose the
greatest threat. By integrating risk
assessment into the gap analysis,
Organizations can prioritize remediation
efforts based on the severity of
identified weaknesses. Once risks and
vulnerabilities have been identified,
organizations compare their current
security controls against a recognized
cybersecurity framework, such as NIST
Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. This
step ensures that security measures align
with industry best practices and
regulatory requirements. By mapping
security controls to frameworks like NIST
800-53, ISO
27001, or CIS
controls, organizations can clearly
identify which areas need improvement to
meet security standards. This comparative
analysis highlights security gaps that
require immediate action, as well as
areas where controls can be strengthened
over time. The final step in a gap
assessment is documenting findings and
translating them into an actionable
security improvement plan. Organizations
should categorize security gaps based on
criticality, risk exposure, and business
impact, ensuring that high priority gaps
are addressed first. This documentation
should include detailed recommendations
for closing security gaps, whether
through policy updates, security tool
enhancements, workforce training, or
improved monitoring capabilities. By
developing a structured remediation
roadmap, organizations can implement
security improvements systematically,
ensuring that cybersecurity investments
are targeted, strategic, and aligned with
risk management goals. A gap assessment
often reveals critical weaknesses in
cybersecurity controls, many of which
leave organizations vulnerable to cyber
threats. These gaps typically arise from
incomplete implementations, outdated
security measures, or misconfigurations
that undermine an organization's
defenses. Identifying these weaknesses is
essential for improving security posture,
ensuring compliance, and strengthening
resilience against cyber attacks. While
every organization faces unique
challenges, certain types of security
gaps are commonly found across
industries. One of the most prevalent
issues is gaps in preventive controls,
which are designed to block threats
before they occur. Many organizations
struggle with inadequate access
management, failing to implement
multi-factor authentication, least
privilege access, or proper user account
monitoring. This can lead to unauthorized
users gaining access to sensitive systems
and data, increasing the risk of insider
threats and external breaches. Another
common issue is lack of encryption, where
organizations fail to properly encrypt
data at rest, data in transit, or cloud
stored information, leaving critical
assets exposed to cybercriminals.
Additionally, missing endpoint security
protections such as outdated antivirus
software or unpatched devices. Can
create entry points for malware and
ransomware attacks. Organizations that do
not regularly update software, apply
security patches, and enforce strict
access controls leave their systems
vulnerable to exploitation. Gaps in
detective controls are another
significant issue, as failure to monitor
security events in real time can allow
cyber threats to go undetected for
extended periods. Many organizations lack
effective logging and monitoring,
resulting in delayed threat detection and
slow incident response times. Security
teams may not have properly configured
intrusion detection systems, network
monitoring tools, or centralized log
analysis, preventing them from
identifying suspicious activity early.
Without a well-defined Security
Information and Event Management SIEM
system, organizations struggle to
correlate security alerts and detect
patterns of attack. Another common gap in
detective controls is inadequate anomaly
detection, where organizations fail to
recognize irregular login attempts,
unusual data transfers, or unauthorized
system changes. Without strong detection
mechanisms, organizations may only
realize they have been compromised after
significant damage has occurred. A
lack of corrective controls is equally
problematic, as it limits an
organization's ability to contain,
mitigate, and recover from cyber
incidents. One of the most frequently
identified gaps is insufficient incident
response planning, where organizations
either lack a documented response
strategy or have an outdated plan that
does not reflect current threats. Without
clear procedures for escalating
incidents, coordinating response efforts,
and containing breaches, security teams
may struggle to act quickly and
efficiently during a cyber attack.
Another major gap is failure to verify
and test backup systems. which can lead
to data loss or prolonged downtime after
a ransomware attack or system failure.
Organizations often assume that backups
are functional but fail to regularly test
recovery procedures, leaving them unable
to restore critical data when needed.
Lastly, many businesses do not conduct
post-incident reviews, missing an
opportunity to analyze security failures
and improve defenses to prevent future
attacks. Identifying and addressing these
common security gaps is essential for
strengthening an organization's overall
cybersecurity framework. A thorough gap.
Assessment helps organizations pinpoint
weaknesses, prioritize remediation
efforts, and implement stronger controls
to minimize risk. By addressing gaps in
preventive, detective, and corrective
controls, organizations can significantly
reduce their exposure to cyber threats
and enhance their ability to detect,
respond to, and recover from security
incidents. Conducting a gap assessment
within the NIST Cybersecurity Framework
2.0 allows organizations to evaluate
security controls across the six core
functions. Govern, identify, protect,
detect, respond, and recover. By
systematically comparing an
organization's existing security measures
against the framework, security teams can
pinpoint deficiencies, prioritize
improvements, and develop a roadmap for
strengthening cybersecurity posture. The
structured approach provided by CSF 2.0
ensures that organizations not only
assess technical defenses, but also
address governance, risk management, and
response capabilities. A well-executed
gap assessment highlights security
weaknesses. Misaligned policies and areas
where an organization falls short of
industry best practices, providing a
foundation for continuous improvement.
The governed function plays a crucial
role in cybersecurity gap assessments by
evaluating cybersecurity policies,
leadership accountability, and risk
management strategies. Organizations
often struggle with unclear cybersecurity
policies, lack of executive oversight,
and misalignment between cybersecurity
objectives and business priorities. A gap
assessment within govern helps identify
weaknesses in leadership involvement,
regulatory compliance, and the
enforcement of security policies.
Organizations that lack clearly defined
cybersecurity roles and responsibilities
often struggle to implement security
controls effectively, making governance
gaps a high priority concern.
Within the identify and protect
functions, gap assessments reveal
deficiencies in asset management,
vulnerability management, and access
control mechanisms. The Identify
function focuses on determining whether
an organization has a comprehensive
inventory of digital and physical assets,
understands its attack surface, and
applies proper risk analysis.
Organizations with incomplete asset
inventories or outdated risk assessments
often leave critical systems exposed. The
Protect function, on the other hand,
ensures that security controls such as
encryption, endpoint protection, and
identity management are in place. A gap
assessment within Protect may uncover
inadequate multi-factor authentication.
Weak data protection strategies or
ineffective employee security training.
Without strong preventive controls,
organizations become easy targets for
cyber attacks. The Detect, Respond, and
Recover functions in CSF 2.0
help organizations evaluate how well they
monitor, manage, and recover from
cybersecurity incidents. A gap assessment
within Detect identifies failures in
continuous monitoring, security logging,
and anomaly detection. Highlighting areas
where real time visibility and threat
intelligence need improvement. The
respond function assesses whether
incident response plans are well
documented, tested, and actionable,
ensuring that security teams can contain
and mitigate threats quickly.
Organizations that lack structured
response protocols or escalation
procedures often experience delayed
reactions to cyber incidents leading to
greater damage. Finally, the recover
function focuses on business continuity
and system restoration. Ensuring that
organizations have tested backup
strategies and post incident review
processes, a gap assessment within
recover may reveal ineffective disaster
recovery planning or insufficient
cybersecurity resilience strategies.
By conducting a gap assessment aligned
with NIST CSF 2.0, organizations
can identify weaknesses across
governance, technical security controls,
and incident response capabilities. This
structured approach ensures that
cybersecurity improvements are
data-driven, prioritized, and
continuously refined to adapt to emerging
threats. A gap assessment provides a
clear roadmap for closing security gaps,
ensuring that organizations enhance their
cybersecurity maturity while aligning
with industry best practices and
compliance requirements. A cybersecurity
gap assessment becomes significantly more
effective when it is aligned with
recognized cybersecurity frameworks. Such
as NIST 800-53, ISO
27001, and the Center for Internet
Security CIS Controls. These
frameworks provide structured
methodologies for evaluating security
controls, ensuring that organizations
identify vulnerabilities, address
weaknesses, and maintain compliance with
industry regulations. By mapping gap
assessment findings to these frameworks,
organizations can prioritize remediation
efforts, strengthen their overall
security posture, and develop a road map
for continuous cybersecurity improvement.
Organizations conducting a gap assessment
using NIST 800-53 benefit from
its comprehensive catalog of security
controls across technical,
administrative, and physical security
domains. This framework provides a
structured approach for assessing risk
management, access control, continuous
monitoring, and incident response
capabilities. A gap assessment using NIST
800-53 ensures that organizations can
systematically compare existing security
measures against well-defined security
baselines,Identifying areas where
controls are missing, misconfigured, or
underutilized. By aligning with NIST
control families, organizations can
address security weaknesses in a
methodical and prioritized manner.
Similarly, ISO 27001 serves
as a widely recognized cybersecurity
framework that emphasizes Information
Security Management Systems, ISMS.
Organizations using ISO
27001 for their gap assessments focus on
governance, compliance, and risk-based
decision-making. This framework is
particularly beneficial for businesses
seeking to establish strong cybersecurity
policies, implement structured risk
assessments, and enhance security
documentation. A gap assessment aligned
with ISO standards helps organizations
determine whether they have sufficient
governance controls, structured security
policies, and effective compliance
mechanisms in place. For organizations
looking to implement practical,
high-impact security controls, the CIS
Controls framework provides a prioritized
set of best practices. Conducting a
gap assessment using CIS Controls allows
organizations to focus on essential
cybersecurity measures such as secure
configuration management, continuous
vulnerability scanning, and endpoint
security enforcement. Many organizations
use CIS Controls to assess basic cyber
hygiene practices and ensure that
fundamental security controls are in
place before advancingToward more complex
security strategies, a gap assessment
aligned with CIS controls helps
businesses quickly identify high-priority
security weaknesses and implement
low-cost, high-impact solutions.
An example of how an organization might
conduct a gap assessment before a
compliance audit illustrates the
importance of framework alignment.
Suppose a healthcare provider is
preparing for an audit under HIPAA
regulations. By conducting a gap
assessment against NIST CSF 2.0
and NIST 800-53, the
organization can systematically evaluate
encryption policies, access control
mechanisms, and incident response
procedures. If the assessment reveals
gaps, such as unsecured electronic health
records, weak authentication controls, or
missing audit logs, the organization can
implement corrective actions before the
compliance review, reducing the risk of
regulatory penalties and improving
security resilience. By aligning gap
assessments with cybersecurity
frameworks, organizations gain a
structured, repeatable approach to
evaluating and improving security
controls. Framework-based gap assessments
streamline regulatory compliance, provide
standardized benchmarks for security
maturity, and ensure that security
improvements are strategic rather than
reactive. This methodology helps
organizations build resilience,
strengthen governance, and continuously
adapt to the evolving cybersecurity
landscape. Once a gap assessment has
identified security weaknesses, the next
critical step is remediating those gaps
and ensuring continuous cybersecurity
improvement. Addressing cybersecurity
gaps requires A structured approach,
ensuring that remediation efforts are
prioritized based on risk severity,
regulatory requirements, and business
impact. Organizations that fail to take
action on identified gaps risk exposing
themselves to cyber threats, compliance
violations, and operational disruptions.
A well executed remediation plan
transforms assessment findings into
actionable improvements, strengthening an
organization's overall security
resilience. Organizations must first
prioritize remediation efforts by
focusing on high risk security gaps that
pose immediate threats. Not all
vulnerabilities are equally dangerous, so
security teams must categorize issues
based on likelihood of exploitation,
potential impact, and regulatory urgency.
High priority gaps, such as unpatched
critical vulnerabilities, misconfigured
access controls, or missing encryption
policies must be addressed immediately to
prevent exploitation by cyberattackers.
Medium and lower risk gaps, such as
incomplete documentation or minor process
inefficiencies can be addressed in later
phases, but should still be monitored to
prevent them from becoming future risks.
This prioritization process ensures that
organizations allocate resources
efficiently, focusing on security
improvements that provide the greatest
risk reduction. Effective remediation
requires A multifaceted approach that
includes policy updates, technical fixes,
workforce training, and continuous
monitoring. Technical security gaps such
as outdated firewalls, weak password
policies, or insufficient endpoint
security. Can often be remediated through
system updates, enhanced configurations,
and the deployment of advanced security
solutions. Administrative gaps, such as
poorly defined cybersecurity policies or
unclear security responsibilities,
require updated governance frameworks,
executive oversight, and employee
training programs to ensure compliance
and proper enforcement. Organizations
should also strengthen security awareness
initiatives, ensuring that employees
understand how to identify phishing
attempts. Follow proper security
procedures and contribute to the
organization's overall risk reduction
strategy. To ensure that remediation
efforts remain effective over time,
organizations must commit to ongoing
cybersecurity assessments and continuous
improvement. Cyber threats are constantly
evolving and a one time gap assessment
and remediation cycle is not enough to
maintain strong security defenses.
Organizations should implement regular
security testing, automated compliance
checks, and proactive threat intelligence
monitoring to detect new vulnerabilities
and emerging risks. Security teams should
also establish A cybersecurity maturity
roadmap, allowing the organization to
progress from basic compliance toward a
proactive, risk-informed security
strategy. A critical component of
continuous improvement is
post-remediation validation, ensuring
that corrective actions have been
properly implemented and are functioning
as intended. Organizations should conduct
follow-up security audits, penetration
tests, and control validations to confirm
that security gaps have been successfully
closed. If gaps persist despite
remediation efforts, security teams must
reassess the underlying cause, refine
their approach, and implement additional
safeguards as necessary. By maintaining
an adaptive and evolving cybersecurity
posture, organizations can reduce
long-term security risks, strengthen
resilience, and remain prepared for the
ever-changing cybersecurity landscape.
Ultimately, gap assessments are not
one-time exercises. They are an essential
part of an organization's ongoing
security lifecycle. Cyber threats,
business operations, and regulatory
requirements continuously change, meaning
that security controls must be regularly
evaluated, refined, and strengthened.
Organizations that commit to ongoing
assessments, continuous control
improvements, and proactive risk
management will be better positioned to
detect, prevent, and respond to cyber
threats before they cause significant
harm. A structured, data-driven approach
to gap assessments and remediation
ensures that cybersecurity remains A
strategic priority, providing long-term
protection for an organization's assets,
reputation, and business operations. That
brings us to the end of this episode of
the Framework Podcast. Thanks for tuning
in and subscribing. We appreciate your
support. Keep the conversation going by
visiting baremetalcyber.com, where you
can dive deeper into cybersecurity topics
and check out my best-selling books on
NIST and other essential cyber insights.
If you enjoyed this episode, please take
a moment to like, rate, and review us on
Apple and Spotify. Until next time, stay
curious and remember, knowledge is
power.
