“Measuring Compliance Is Not Measuring Risk: Here’s the Fix”

Compliance and risk management are not interchangeable. While compliance ensures organizations meet regulatory requirements, it doesn’t guarantee security. Risk management, however, focuses on identifying and addressing actual threats, making it essential for protecting healthcare systems from costly breaches.

Key Takeaways:

• Compliance vs. Risk: Compliance is retrospective, checklist-driven, and focused on meeting standards. Risk management is forward-looking, prioritizing threats and vulnerabilities.
• Healthcare's Unique Risks: Cybercriminals target healthcare data, which is highly valuable on the black market. Compliance alone often fails to address emerging threats.
• Limitations of Compliance: Regulations lag behind evolving cyberattacks, audits are periodic snapshots, and compliance can create a false sense of security.
• Risk-Based Solutions: Running regular risk assessments, adopting frameworks like NIST CSF, and implementing continuous monitoring are critical steps.
• Tools to Help: Platforms like Censinet RiskOps™ and AI-powered tools streamline risk management, enabling healthcare organizations to address threats efficiently.

Why It Matters:

Relying solely on compliance leaves healthcare organizations vulnerable to breaches, operational disruptions, and reputational damage. A shift to risk-based strategies ensures better protection for patient data and overall system security.

Tackling Cyber Threats in Healthcare with Censinet

Problems with Compliance-Only Approaches

When healthcare organizations depend solely on compliance frameworks, they face major challenges that leave them vulnerable to cyberattacks. Let’s break down the key issues with relying exclusively on compliance.

Regulations Can't Keep Up with New Threats

Compliance frameworks are reactive by nature - they're designed in response to known threats, often long after the damage is done. This delay leaves organizations focused on outdated requirements while modern attackers exploit gaps that regulations haven't addressed yet.

Take the MOVEit file transfer software breach as an example. This attack affected over 2,500 organizations and compromised the data of 77 million individuals across industries like healthcare, government, and finance. Many of the impacted companies were fully compliant with existing regulations, yet hackers leveraged a previously unknown zero-day vulnerability ^[2].

Healthcare is particularly vulnerable because cybercriminals see healthcare data as highly valuable. However, compliance frameworks often take years to update, leaving organizations stuck with outdated strategies to defend against cutting-edge threats. This lag highlights the urgent need for proactive risk management beyond compliance.

One-Time Checks vs. Constant Monitoring

Compliance audits are a snapshot in time, but the threat landscape evolves continuously. Between audits, new vulnerabilities emerge, software changes, staff turnover happens, and attackers refine their methods. An organization might pass a HIPAA audit in January but fall victim to a major breach just months later.

The numbers speak volumes. In 2023, over 220 cyberattacks targeted healthcare organizations, impacting more than 36 million people - a sharp rise from the 44 million affected in 2022 ^[3]. Compliance audits ask, "Were we compliant last month?" Effective cybersecurity, however, asks, "Are we secure right now?" Without constant monitoring, organizations risk falling behind as threats evolve.

Thinking You're Safe When You're Not

One of the most dangerous pitfalls of a compliance-only approach is the false sense of security it creates. Passing audits or earning certifications can lead organizations to believe they're well-protected, fostering complacency that can have devastating consequences.

"Being compliant limits your approach to security to the narrow confines of the standard you are using... The result is that you may be compliant but not necessarily secure."

• Gary Hibberd, The Professor of Communicating Cyber at The Cyberfort Group ^[1]

The reality is sobering. Over 93% of healthcare organizations have experienced a data breach in the past three years, and 57% have faced more than five breaches during that time ^[4]. These incidents occurred even in organizations that met regulatory requirements.

Consider the Equifax breach, where hackers exploited an unpatched Apache Struts vulnerability to access sensitive consumer data. Despite likely being compliant, Equifax's framework failed to address this vulnerability, leaving an opening for attackers ^[2]. This highlights how compliance can create blind spots if organizations focus more on checking boxes than addressing real risks.

The consequences of this mindset are severe. For instance, in January 2025, Visionworks faced a class action lawsuit after a breach exposed the personal and financial information of nearly 40,000 customers ^[5]. Such incidents underscore the financial and reputational damage that can arise when organizations rely solely on compliance.

Healthcare organizations face the highest average cost per capita for data breaches ^[4]. Relying on compliance alone isn't just risky - it's a gamble that most can't afford to take. These false assurances hinder meaningful efforts to reduce risk and strengthen security.

Moving to Risk-Based Cybersecurity Methods

Healthcare organizations need to move beyond checkbox-style audits and embrace a proactive, continuous approach to managing cybersecurity risks. With the average cost of a data breach climbing to $4.88 million - and even higher for critical infrastructure entities ^[6] - waiting for the next audit cycle to identify vulnerabilities is no longer an option. Attackers are constantly evolving, and healthcare systems must keep pace to protect both data and patient safety.

Running Complete Risk Assessments

A thorough risk assessment is essential for identifying and prioritizing vulnerabilities across an organization’s digital ecosystem, from electronic health records (EHRs) to medical devices and third-party vendors. These assessments go beyond surface-level checks, diving into the specifics of the organization's technology stack, data flows, and potential entry points for attackers.

More importantly, cybersecurity in healthcare isn’t just about safeguarding data - it’s about protecting lives. Cyber risks can directly impact patient care and safety ^[7]. That’s why organizations must conduct regular security audits, vulnerability assessments, and penetration testing. These evaluations can’t be limited to an annual schedule; the rapidly shifting threat landscape demands continuous vigilance.

Cybersecurity risks affect every corner of an organization, not just the IT department ^[7]. Effective risk assessments require input from clinicians, administrators, and leadership to address vulnerabilities that could disrupt patient care. By involving a diverse range of stakeholders, healthcare organizations can ensure a more holistic understanding of their risks and develop effective strategies to mitigate them.

Once risks are identified, structured frameworks can help translate those insights into actionable steps.

Using the NIST Cybersecurity Framework

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (NIST CSF) offers a practical, adaptable approach for healthcare organizations of all sizes. Unlike rigid checklists, this framework focuses on six interconnected functions: Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover, and the newly added Govern function in version 2.0.

This flexibility makes the NIST CSF suitable for both small clinics and large hospital systems, allowing them to scale their cybersecurity efforts based on available resources and specific risks ^[10]. According to Jeff Marron, a cybersecurity specialist at NIST:

"One of our main goals is to help make the updated publication more of a resource guide. The revision is more actionable so that health care organizations can improve their cybersecurity posture and comply with the Security Rule." ^[9]

The new Govern function emphasizes the importance of aligning cybersecurity initiatives with business objectives and securing leadership commitment ^[8]. This addition highlights that effective cybersecurity isn’t just about technical controls - it requires integration into the organization’s broader strategy.

Healthcare organizations can use the NIST Cybersecurity Framework Implementation Guide to evaluate their current practices, pinpoint gaps, and create a roadmap for improvement ^[11]. By adopting this framework, organizations can shift from a reactive compliance mindset to a proactive risk management approach.

Setting Up Continuous Monitoring

Traditional security methods that rely on periodic assessments leave significant gaps between evaluations. Continuous monitoring eliminates these blind spots by providing real-time visibility into networks and endpoints. This allows security teams to detect and address threats before they can compromise patient care or sensitive data.

With continuous monitoring, organizations can quickly identify anomalies and contain threats before they escalate ^[12]. To achieve this, they need the right tools, such as Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems, Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), and endpoint detection solutions. Together, these technologies offer comprehensive coverage across the IT environment ^[12].

However, continuous monitoring is about more than just technology - it requires a cultural shift. Security teams must be trained to think proactively and focus on reducing the time it takes to detect and respond to threats, rather than simply meeting compliance requirements ^[6]. Success should be measured by how quickly teams can act on the intelligence they gather.

Organizations must also establish clear protocols for handling cyber incidents. This includes immediate steps to contain breaches, effective communication with stakeholders, and strategies for recovering compromised systems ^[13]. Continuous monitoring is only as effective as the organization’s ability to act on the insights it provides.

sbb-itb-535baee

Using Censinet's RiskOps™ and AI Tools for Scalable Risk Management

Healthcare organizations face unique challenges when it comes to managing medical devices, patient data, and complex vendor networks. To tackle these, they need tools specifically designed for the healthcare industry - and that's where Censinet's solutions shine.

Simplifying Risk Assessments with Censinet RiskOps™

Censinet RiskOps™ is a cloud-based risk exchange that facilitates secure sharing of cybersecurity and risk data between healthcare organizations and vendors ^[14]. By leveraging a network of over 50,000 vendors and products, the platform eliminates redundant efforts, allowing organizations to tap into shared intelligence across the healthcare industry ^[14].

For example, Tower Health streamlined their risk assessment process, reducing resource needs from three full-time roles to just two ^[14].

What makes Censinet RiskOps™ so effective is its healthcare-specific design. As Matt Christensen, Sr. Director GRC at Intermountain Health, puts it:

"Healthcare is the most complex industry... You can't just take a tool and apply it to healthcare if it wasn't built specifically for healthcare" ^[14].

The platform is tailored to handle the intricate workflows, regulatory demands, and risk factors unique to healthcare. It automates third-party and enterprise risk assessments, allowing organizations to access pre-existing risk data and assessments completed by other healthcare entities. This not only speeds up the process but also enhances accuracy and consistency.

Accelerating Processes with Censinet AITM

Censinet takes efficiency a step further with its AI-powered tool, Censinet AITM. By integrating artificial intelligence, the platform significantly speeds up risk assessments. Vendors can complete security questionnaires in seconds, while the system automatically summarizes evidence, captures integration details, and identifies fourth-party risk exposures.

The AI operates under a "human-in-the-loop" model, meaning automated processes are guided by configurable rules and human oversight. This ensures that healthcare organizations can scale their risk management efforts without losing the nuanced judgment required for such a complex industry.

Ed Gaudet, CEO and Founder of Censinet, underscores the importance of responsible AI use:

"Our collaboration with AWS enables us to deliver Censinet AI™ to streamline risk management while ensuring responsible, secure AI deployment and use. With Censinet RiskOps, we're enabling healthcare leaders to manage cyber risks at scale to ensure safe, uninterrupted care" ^[15].

The AI also generates detailed risk summary reports, cutting down on the time security teams spend on documentation and analysis. This allows teams to focus more on strategic mitigation efforts.

Centralized Risk Management and Oversight

Censinet RiskOps™ offers centralized risk visualization and management, presenting real-time data through an intuitive dashboard. This provides healthcare organizations with a clear view of their risk posture, spanning everything from medical devices and clinical applications to third-party vendors and supply chain partners.

The platform also supports AI governance, acting as a kind of "air traffic control" for managing AI-related risks. It routes key findings and tasks to designated stakeholders, such as AI governance committees, for timely review and approval.

Collaboration is a cornerstone of the system. Governance, Risk, and Compliance teams can work seamlessly, with critical risks automatically assigned to the right people. This ensures that issues are addressed promptly and accountability is maintained across departments, preventing risks from being overlooked.

Compliance-Focused vs. Risk-Based Methods: A Comparison

Compliance sets the baseline by ensuring organizations meet minimum standards, but risk-based methods go a step further by addressing actual threats and vulnerabilities. While compliance is about checking boxes, risk-based security is all about staying ahead of potential dangers.

Main Differences and Benefits

The differences between compliance-focused and risk-based methods become evident when you break down their goals and how they operate:

This breakdown highlights why a shift toward risk-based methods often leads to better cybersecurity outcomes. For example, organizations that focus on risk-based strategies can achieve their desired risk levels at significantly lower costs. One company increased its projected risk reduction by 7.5 times without additional spending - simply by reorganizing its security efforts based on risk assessments ^[2]. This shows how prioritizing threats can improve security while making the most of available resources.

Healthcare, in particular, faces unique and pressing challenges. During the pandemic, cybercrime surged by 400%, with business email compromise in healthcare alone jumping 279% in 2022 ^[16]. These evolving threats expose the weaknesses of a static, compliance-only approach. Compliance frameworks often fail to address the broader scope of risks, leaving gaps in protection. For instance, global healthcare cyberattacks rose by 74% in 2021 ^[18], many of them targeting vulnerabilities compliance standards don't cover.

Why Risk-Based Models Work Better

Risk-based frameworks not only address today’s threats but also make smarter use of security budgets. Unlike compliance standards, which often lag behind the latest attack methods, risk-based approaches evolve alongside emerging threats. This adaptability ensures that organizations stay prepared for new challenges.

Historical breaches have shown the limitations of focusing solely on compliance. Risk-based models, on the other hand, allow organizations to allocate resources where they matter most - targeting critical vulnerabilities. In healthcare, where the average cost to remediate a breach is $408 per record (compared to $148 in other industries), strategic investments can lead to significant savings ^[17].

Platforms like Censinet RiskOps™ enhance these efforts by providing healthcare-specific risk intelligence and automation. By leveraging shared threat intelligence and pre-existing risk assessments, healthcare organizations can stay ahead of evolving threats. This collaborative approach ensures that risk-based strategies remain relevant to the industry’s unique challenges.

Research suggests that optimal cybersecurity investments should amount to less than 37% of potential breach losses ^[2]. Risk-based frameworks help organizations calculate these investments with precision, focusing on the likelihood and impact of real threats instead of generic compliance mandates.

Another key advantage of risk-based models is their emphasis on resilience and recovery. While compliance prioritizes documentation, risk-based strategies focus on incident response, business continuity, and adaptive security measures. This proactive mindset ensures that organizations can not only prevent attacks but also recover effectively if breaches occur.

Conclusion: Moving from Compliance to Complete Risk Management

Main Points Summary

The healthcare industry is at a turning point. Traditional, compliance-driven security measures are proving inadequate against the increasingly advanced cyber threats of today. Between 2018 and 2022, reported data breaches in healthcare surged by 93% ^[19]. High-profile incidents like the 2023 MOVEit breach, which impacted over 2,500 organizations and 77 million individuals, highlight that even meeting regulatory standards often fails to prevent catastrophic outcomes ^[2].

The core problem lies in the misconception that compliance equals security. Compliance merely ensures organizations meet baseline requirements ^[2]. This false sense of security leaves critical vulnerabilities exposed, as regulations often lag behind the evolving threat landscape. It’s clear that healthcare organizations must pivot to a more proactive and strategic approach.

Risk-based cybersecurity offers a smarter alternative. By focusing on identifying, assessing, and prioritizing threats based on their likelihood and potential impact, this approach helps organizations allocate resources more efficiently ^[2]. Instead of spreading efforts thinly across all compliance demands, healthcare providers can target the most pressing risks, improving protection where it matters most.

The economic case for this shift is just as persuasive. Risk-based strategies often reduce cybersecurity costs while maintaining strong defenses ^[2]. Given the staggering financial impact of breaches - healthcare breaches cost an average of $408 per stolen health record compared to $148 for non-health records ^[17][20] - strategic investments in risk management can prevent significant losses.

Healthcare faces unique challenges that make this transition especially urgent. Stolen health records are highly valuable, fetching up to 10 times more on the dark web than stolen credit card numbers ^[17][20]. Additionally, Trojans account for roughly 79% of malware attacks on healthcare systems ^[19]. Beyond financial loss, cyberattacks can disrupt medical services, putting patient safety directly at risk.

Next Steps

To embrace this shift, healthcare organizations should start with thorough risk assessments to uncover vulnerabilities that compliance frameworks might miss. Security efforts must align with business objectives, focusing on protecting critical assets and ensuring smooth operations. Prioritizing high-risk areas for investment is key ^[2].

Solutions like Censinet RiskOps™ can facilitate this transformation by providing healthcare-specific risk intelligence and AI-driven automation, all while maintaining human oversight. This balanced approach empowers healthcare leaders to address complex risks swiftly without compromising patient care or safety.

Adopting risk-based cybersecurity isn’t just a technical adjustment - it’s a strategic necessity. Protecting patient data, ensuring operational continuity, and staying ahead of increasingly sophisticated threats demand this level of commitment. The question is no longer whether to make this change but how quickly organizations can implement comprehensive risk management to safeguard what matters most.

FAQs

Why isn’t meeting compliance requirements enough to protect healthcare organizations from cyber threats?

In healthcare, simply meeting compliance standards won't fully shield organizations from cyber threats. Compliance is about sticking to established rules and policies, but those guidelines often fall short when it comes to addressing new and evolving risks in real-time. It’s like locking the front door while leaving the windows wide open.

To truly protect sensitive patient information and critical systems, healthcare organizations need to go beyond the basics. A proactive, risk-based approach is key. This means constantly identifying, assessing, and addressing potential threats as they arise. By focusing on actual risks rather than just checking regulatory boxes, organizations can stay ahead of the curve and defend against the ever-changing landscape of cyberattacks.

How can healthcare organizations effectively shift to a risk-based cybersecurity approach?

To shift toward a risk-based cybersecurity strategy, healthcare organizations should begin with a detailed risk assessment. This process identifies vulnerabilities and prioritizes threats based on their potential impact. By doing so, resources can be directed toward addressing the most pressing risks instead of merely aiming to meet compliance standards.

Adopting a structured risk management framework, such as NIST, provides a clear roadmap for handling risks effectively. Key steps include regular monitoring, frequent testing, and continuous staff training to stay ahead of emerging threats. Taking this proactive approach not only strengthens defenses but also helps safeguard patient data and supports the smooth operation of healthcare services.

How does continuous monitoring strengthen cybersecurity beyond just meeting compliance requirements?

Continuous monitoring enhances cybersecurity by delivering real-time insights into your organization's security landscape. Unlike periodic compliance checks, it allows for the proactive detection and resolution of vulnerabilities as they arise.

By keeping a constant eye on threats, controls, and potential weak points, organizations can adjust to shifting cyber risks and minimize their exposure. This method moves beyond static compliance measures, providing a more flexible and stronger defense to maintain a safer and more resilient security framework.

Related posts

• 5 Challenges in Healthcare Cyber Risk Management
• The Dynamic Cybersecurity Risk Register: Essential Components for Real-Time Threat Management
• Risk Register Optimization: Aligning Cost, Impact, and Likelihood Assessments for Enhanced Security Posture
• “A Playbook for HDOs: Mapping Cybersecurity Frameworks to Real Risk Reduction”