Sep 18 2025

Managing AI Risk: Building a Risk-Aware Strategy with ISO 42001, ISO 27001, and NIST

Category: AI,AI Governance,CISO,ISO 27k,ISO 42001,vCISOdisc7 @ 7:59 am

Managing AI Risk: A Practical Approach to Responsibly Managing AI with ISO 42001 treats building a risk-aware strategy, relevant standards (ISO 42001, ISO 27001, NIST, etc.), the role of an Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS), and what the future of AI risk management might look like.


1. Framing a Risk-Aware AI Strategy
The book begins by laying out the need for organizations to approach AI not just as a source of opportunity (innovation, efficiency, etc.) but also as a domain rife with risk: ethical risks (bias, fairness), safety, transparency, privacy, regulatory exposure, reputational risk, and so on. It argues that a risk-aware strategy must be integrated into the whole AI lifecycle—from design to deployment and maintenance. Key in its framing is that risk management shouldn’t be an afterthought or a compliance exercise; it should be embedded in strategy, culture, governance structures. The idea is to shift from reactive to proactive: anticipating what could go wrong, and building in mitigations early.

2. How the book leverages ISO 42001 and related standards
A core feature of the book is that it aligns its framework heavily with ISO IEC 42001:2023, which is the first international standard to define requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continuously improving an Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS). The book draws connections between 42001 and adjacent or overlapping standards—such as ISO 27001 (information security), ISO 31000 (risk management in general), as well as NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). The treatment helps the reader see how these standards can interoperate—where one handles confidentiality, security, access controls (ISO 27001), another handles overall risk governance, etc.—and how 42001 fills gaps specific to AI: lifecycle governance, transparency, ethics, stakeholder traceability.

3. The Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS) as central tool
The concept of an AI Management System (AIMS) is at the heart of the book. An AIMS per ISO 42001 is a set of interrelated or interacting elements of an organization (policies, controls, processes, roles, tools) intended to ensure responsible development and use of AI systems. The author Andrew Pattison walks through what components are essential: leadership commitment; roles and responsibilities; risk identification, impact assessment; operational controls; monitoring, performance evaluation; continual improvement. One strength is the practical guidance: not just “you should do these”, but how to embed them in organizations that don’t have deep AI maturity yet. The book emphasizes that an AIMS is more than a set of policies—it’s a living system that must adapt, learn, and respond as AI systems evolve, as new risks emerge, and as external demands (laws, regulations, public expectations) shift.

4. Comparison and contrasts: ISO 42001, ISO 27001, and NIST
In comparing standards, the book does a good job of pointing out both overlaps and distinct value: for example, ISO 27001 is strong on information security, confidentiality, integrity, availability; it has proven structures for risk assessment and for ensuring controls. But AI systems pose additional, unique risks (bias, accountability of decision-making, transparency, possible harms in deployment) that are not fully covered by a pure security standard. NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework provides flexible guidance especially for U.S. organisations or those aligning with U.S. governmental expectations: mapping, measuring, managing risks in a more domain-agnostic way. Meanwhile, ISO 42001 brings in the notion of an AI-specific management system, lifecycle oversight, and explicit ethical / governance obligations. The book argues that a robust strategy often uses multiple standards: e.g. ISO 27001 for information security, ISO 42001 for overall AI governance, NIST AI RMF for risk measurement & tools.

5. Practical tools, governance, and processes
The author does more than theory. There are discussions of impact assessments, risk matrices, audit / assurance, third-party oversight, monitoring for model drift / unanticipated behavior, documentation, and transparency. Some of the more compelling content is about how to do risk assessments early (before deployment), how to engage stakeholders, how to map out potential harms (both known risks and emergent/unknown ones), how governance bodies (steering committees, ethics boards) can play a role, how responsibility should be assigned, how controls should be tested. The book does point out real challenges: culture change, resource constraints, measurement difficulties, especially for ethical or fairness concerns. But it provides guidance on how to surmount or mitigate those.

6. What might be less strong / gaps
While the book is very useful, there are areas where some readers might want more. For instance, in scaling these practices in organizations with very little AI maturity: the resource costs, how to bootstrap without overengineering. Also, while it references standards and regulations broadly, there may be less depth on certain jurisdictional regulatory regimes (e.g. EU AI Act in detail, or sector-specific requirements). Another area that is always hard—and the book is no exception—is anticipating novel risks: what about very advanced AI systems (e.g. generative models, large language models) or AI in uncontrolled environments? Some of the guidance is still high-level when it comes to edge-cases or worst-case scenarios. But this is a natural trade-off given the speed of AI advancement.

7. Future of AI & risk management: trends and implications
Looking ahead, the book suggests that risk management in AI will become increasingly central as both regulatory pressure and societal expectations grow. Standards like ISO 42001 will be adopted more widely, possibly even made mandatory or incorporated into regulation. The idea of “certification” or attestation of compliance will gain traction. Also, the monitoring, auditing, and accountability functions will become more technically and institutionally mature: better tools for algorithmic transparency, bias measurement, model explainability, data provenance, and impact assessments. There’ll also be more demand for cross-organizational cooperation (e.g. supply chains and third-party models), for oversight of external models, for AI governance in ecosystems rather than isolated systems. Finally, there is an implication that organizations that don’t get serious about risk will pay—through regulation, loss of trust, or harm. So the future is of AI risk management moving from “nice-to-have” to “mission-critical.”


Overall, Managing AI Risk is a strong, timely guide. It bridges theory (standards, frameworks) and practice (governance, processes, tools) well. It makes the case that ISO 42001 is a useful centerpiece for any AI risk strategy, especially when combined with other standards. If you are planning or refining an AI strategy, building or implementing an AIMS, or anticipating future regulatory change, this book gives a solid and actionable foundation.

Secure Your Business. Simplify Compliance. Gain Peace of Mind

InfoSec services | InfoSec books | Follow our blog | DISC llc is listed on The vCISO Directory | ISO 27k Chat bot | Comprehensive vCISO Services | ISMS Services | Security Risk Assessment Services | Mergers and Acquisition Security

Tags: iso 27001, ISO 42001, Managing AI Risk, NIST


Jan 16 2025

7 steps for evaluating, comparing, and selecting frameworks

Category: ISO 27k,NIST CSF,NIST Privacy,vCISOdisc7 @ 11:38 am

7 steps for evaluating, comparing, and selecting frameworks:

  1. Identify frameworks that align with regulatory compliance requirements.
  2. Assess the organization’s risk appetite and select frameworks that align with its strategic goals.
  3. Compare your organization to others in the industry to determine the most commonly used frameworks and their relevance.
  4. Choose frameworks that can scale as the business grows.
  5. Select frameworks that help the organization better align with its clients.
  6. Conduct a cost analysis to assess the feasibility of implementing the framework(s).
  7. Determine whether the framework can be implemented in-house or if external guidance is needed.

This process helps organizations select the most suitable framework for their needs and long-term.

Why Your Organization Needs ISO 27001 Amid Rising Risks

10 key benefits of ISO 27001 Cert for SMBs

ISO 27001: Building a Culture of Security and Continuous Improvement

Penetration Testing and ISO 27001 – Securing ISMS

Secure Your Digital Transformation with ISO 27001

Significance of ISO 27017 and ISO 27018 for Cloud Services

The Risk Assessment Process and the tool that supports it

What is the significance of ISO 27001 certification for your business?

ISO 27k Chat bot

Pragmatic ISO 27001 Risk Assessments

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 – Mastering Risk Assessment and the Statement of Applicability

Risk Register Templates: Asset and risk register template system for cybersecurity and information security management suitable for ISO 27001 and NIST

ISO 27001 implementation ISO 27002 ISO 27701 ISO 27017 ISO27k

How to Address AI Security Risks With ISO 27001

How to Conduct an ISO 27001 Internal Audit

4 Benefits of ISO 27001 Certification

How to Check If a Company Is ISO 27001 Certified

How to Implement ISO 27001: A 9-Step Guide

ISO 27001 Standard, Risk Assessment and Gap Assessment

ISO 27001 standards and training

What is ISO 27002:2022

Previous posts on ISO 27k

Securing Cloud Services: A pragmatic guide

ISO 27001/2 latest titles

A Comprehensive Guide to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0: Strategies, Implementation, and Best Practice

CIS Controls in Practice: A Comprehensive Implementation Guide

InfoSec services | InfoSec books | Follow our blog | DISC llc is listed on The vCISO Directory | ISO 27k Chat bot | Comprehensive vCISO Services | ISMS Services | Security Risk Assessment Services

Tags: CIS, ISO, NIST


Dec 10 2009

What is a risk assessment framework

Category: Information Security,Risk AssessmentDISC @ 5:46 pm

Computer security is an ongoing threat?!?
Image by Adam Melancon via Flickr

The Security Risk Assessment Handbook: A Complete Guide for Performing Security Risk Assessments

Definition – A risk assessment framework (RAF) is a strategy for prioritizing and sharing information about the security risks to an information technology (IT) infrastructure.

A good RAF organizes and presents information in a way that both technical and non-technical personnel can understand. It has three important components: a shared vocabulary, consistent assessment methods and a reporting system.

The common view an RAF provides helps an organization see which of its systems are at low risk for abuse or attack and which are at high risk. The data an RAF provides is useful for addressing potential threats pro-actively, planning budgets and creating a culture in which the value of data is understood and appreciated.

There are several risk assessment frameworks that are accepted as industry standards including:

Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems (NIST guide) from the National Institute of Standards.

Operationally Critical Threat, Asset, and Vulnerability Evaluation (OCTAVE) from the Computer Emergency Readiness Team.

Control Objectives for Information and related Technology (COBIT) from the Information Systems Audit and Control Association.

To create a risk management framework, an organization can use or modify the NIST guide, OCTAVE or COBIT or create a framework inhouse that fits the organization’s business requirements. However the framework is built, it should:

1. Inventory and categorize all IT assets.
Assets include hardware, software, data, processes and interfaces to external systems.

2. Identify threats.
Natural disasters or power outages should be considered in addition to threats such as malicious access to systems or malware attacks.

3. Identify corresponding vulnerabilities.
Data about vulnerabilities can be obtained from security testing and system scans. Anecdotal information about known software and/or vendor issues should also be considered.

4. Prioritize potential risks.
Prioritization has three sub-phases: evaluating existing security controls, determining the likelihood and impact of a breach based on those controls, and assigning risk levels.

5. Document risks and determine action.
This is an on-going process, with a pre-determined schedule for issuing reports. The report should document the risk level for all IT assests, define what level of risk an organization is willing to tolerate and accept and identify procedures at each risk level for implementing and maintaining security controls.




Tags: Business, COBIT, Computer security, Data, Fire and Security, Information Technology, iso 27001, iso 27002, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, OCTAVE, Risk management, Security, security controls, Technology