Introduction

In today’s world, where Cybersecurity is more important than ever, organisations are turning to structured Frameworks to help them build robust Security Measures. Two of the most widely used Frameworks are the NIST Cybersecurity Framework [CSF] & the Center for Internet Security [CIS] Controls. But which one suits your needs? Let’s dive into the NIST CSF vs CIS Controls discussion to understand their key differences, historical context & practical applications.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Key Differences

The NIST [CSF] & CIS Controls are both designed to improve an organisation’s Cybersecurity posture, but they come from different perspectives.

• NIST [CSF]: Focuses on providing a flexible, Risk-based Framework for managing Cybersecurity Risks. It’s high-level & aimed at improving overall cybersecurity across sectors. The NIST [CSF] includes five (5) key functions: Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond & Recover, making it adaptable to various types of Organisations.
  
• CIS Controls: On the other hand, the [CIS] Controls are a set of best practices aimed at addressing specific Technical aspects of Cybersecurity. The CIS Framework includes 20 controls, organised into three (3) categories: Basic, Foundational & Organisational. These Controls are more prescriptive, providing concrete steps that Organisations can follow to secure their systems.

While both Frameworks have a common goal—improving Cybersecurity—they differ in their approach. NIST [CSF] is broader & more flexible, while CIS Controls are more granular & technical.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Historical Perspective

Both the NIST [CSF] & CIS Controls have emerged from different historical contexts. The NIST [CSF] was first introduced in 2014 in response to a growing need for a national Standard on Cybersecurity Risk Management. It was designed with flexibility in mind, to be applicable across industries & adaptable to different risk profiles.

In contrast, the CIS Controls have been around for longer, with the first version published in 2008. The CIS was created by a group of Cybersecurity experts to offer Organisations actionable & prioritised steps for mitigating risks. The CIS Controls have evolved over the years, with a stronger focus on Actionable Steps & Technical Controls.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Practical Applications

When it comes to practical applications, the NIST [CSF] is ideal for organisations looking to implement a broad & adaptable Cybersecurity Strategy. Its Risk-based approach makes it applicable to a wide range of industries, from Government Agencies to Private Corporations.

The CIS Controls, on the other hand, are better suited for Organisations that want a more tactical approach to Cybersecurity. If you need to quickly implement technical safeguards or prioritise Security Measures based on your organisation’s needs, the CIS Controls provide a structured way to do so.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Strengths & Limitations

Each Framework has its strengths & limitations, depending on what your organisation is aiming to achieve.

• Strengths of NIST [CSF]:
  
  • Highly flexible & adaptable.
  • Risk-based, allowing customisation for different sectors.
  • Provides a comprehensive Cybersecurity Management Strategy.
• Limitations of NIST [CSF]:
  
  • Can be too broad for Smaller Organisations.
  • Requires a higher level of understanding & implementation for Risk Management.
• Strengths of [CIS] Controls:
  
  • Provides clear, actionable steps.
  • Focuses on Technical Security Controls, making it easier to implement.
  • Well-suited for Organisations looking for practical, measurable improvements.
• Limitations of [CIS] Controls:
  
  • Less flexible than NIST [CSF], with a more rigid, one-size-fits-all approach.
  • Primarily technical, which may not suit all Organisational Needs.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Diverse Perspectives

From a Cybersecurity Expert’s perspective, the NIST [CSF] may be seen as the ideal starting point for Organisations that want a comprehensive, overarching strategy. It helps organisations assess their Cybersecurity Maturity & prioritise actions based on Risk.

On the other hand, for a Smaller Company or one with fewer resources, the [CIS] Controls might be seen as more practical & achievable. Since the [CIS] Controls focus on specific tasks, they can often be implemented quickly & directly.

NIST CSF vs CIS Controls: Use Case Comparisons

Let’s compare both Frameworks in terms of real-world use cases. Consider a Large Organisation with a complex IT Infrastructure & diverse Cybersecurity Risks. For them, the NIST [CSF] offers a flexible roadmap to build a Custom Cybersecurity Strategy that aligns with their Organisational Needs.

Now, imagine a Small Business looking to enhance its basic Cybersecurity Posture. The [CIS] Controls would likely be a better fit. The [CIS] Controls provide clear steps to secure the Organisation’s Systems without overwhelming the resources of a Smaller Business.

Takeaways

• NIST [CSF] is flexible, broad & strategic. It’s best suited for Organisations that want a Risk-based, overarching Framework for Cybersecurity.
• CIS Controls are more prescriptive & tactical. They’re ideal for Organisations seeking clear, actionable steps to strengthen their Security.
• Both Frameworks complement each other & Organisations may benefit from using both in tandem. NIST [CSF] can provide the strategic direction, while CIS Controls can address specific technical measures.

FAQ

Need help? 

Neumetric provides organisations the necessary help to achieve its Cybersecurity, Compliance, Governance, Privacy, Certifications & Pentesting goals. 

Organisations & Businesses, specifically those which provide SaaS & AI solutions, usually need a Cybersecurity Partner for meeting & maintaining the ongoing security & privacy needs & requirements of their Clients & Customers. 

SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIST, HIPAA, HECVAT, EU GDPR are some of the Frameworks that are served by Fusion – a centralised, automated, AI-enabled SaaS solution provided by Neumetric. 

Reach out to us!