For years, cybersecurity has been expected to “prevent attacks.” That expectation is common—and flawed. Incidents can happen even with strong controls. The real problem is making decisions blindly.
This session introduces a shift in mindset: risk management is not about implementing controls or turning “red” into “yellow.” It is about making informed decisions on which scenarios to accept, mitigate, transfer, or avoid—based on risk appetite, priorities, and constraints.

We start by clarifying a widespread confusion: what risk is (and what it is not), separating it from threats, vulnerabilities, findings, controls, or maturity. Then we examine why qualitative methods (risk matrices and heat maps) are weak decision inputs: ambiguity, bias, low repeatability, and poor comparability—especially when you need to choose between “high vs. high” risks or build a cost-benefit case.

Finally, we introduce quantification as the natural evolution of risk management, showing how FAIR translates cyber scenarios into business terms the organization can understand and act on: loss event frequency/probability, loss magnitude, and ranges. We close with practical use cases: control and roadmap prioritization, budget justification, risk appetite discussions, board/finance communication, and third-party and cloud risk evaluation.

Target audiencie: CISOs, security leaders, GRC/Compliance teams, risk managers, auditors, IT leaders, finance stakeholders, and executives involved in prioritization and risk acceptance.

Estimated duration: 35-45 mins