NIST Cybersecurity Framework: A Technical Deep Dive

1) Introduction and Scope

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) is a voluntary, risk-based cybersecurity program management standard developed by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). It provides a flexible, scalable, and adaptable structure for organizations of all sizes and sectors to manage cybersecurity risks. Initially targeted at critical infrastructure, CSF 2.0 (released 2024) significantly broadens its scope, positioning it as a foundational element for comprehensive cybersecurity governance across all organizations.

This study guide aims to provide a technically rigorous exploration of the NIST CSF. It moves beyond high-level principles to dissect the framework's internal architecture, underlying technical foundations, practical implementation details, and defensive engineering considerations. This guide is intended for cybersecurity professionals, system administrators, security architects, and engineers who require a deep, actionable understanding of how to implement and leverage the CSF effectively within complex computing environments.

2) Deep Technical Foundations

The CSF is built upon established cybersecurity principles and best practices, translating abstract security concepts into actionable outcomes. Its strength lies in its comprehensive, yet modular, structure that can be tailored to specific organizational contexts.

Core Technical Concepts:

• Risk Management as the Central Tenet: The CSF's efficacy hinges on a systematic approach to understanding and mitigating risks. This involves:

  • Threat Modeling: Employing structured methodologies to identify potential threats and attack vectors. Techniques like STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) are used to analyze threats to system components and data flows. For instance, analyzing a web application might identify:
    • Spoofing: An attacker impersonating a legitimate user via stolen credentials. This could be technically realized by crafting a forged authentication token or exploiting a session fixation vulnerability.
    • Tampering: An attacker modifying database records or configuration files. This could involve SQL injection attacks to alter data, or exploiting file upload vulnerabilities to overwrite critical system files.
    • Denial of Service: An attacker overwhelming a web server with requests, rendering it unavailable. This can range from simple HTTP floods to more sophisticated distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks leveraging botnets.
  • Vulnerability Assessment & Management: This encompasses both automated scanning (e.g., Nessus, OpenVAS, Qualys) for known CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) and manual analysis, including static (SAST) and dynamic (DAST) application security testing. It also involves understanding software composition analysis (SCA) to identify vulnerabilities in third-party libraries.
    • Example (CVE Analysis): A vulnerability like CVE-2023-XXXX (e.g., a buffer overflow in a network service) would be identified by scanners. The technical impact might be arbitrary code execution if the service is running with elevated privileges.
    • SAST Example: A SAST tool might flag a potential SQL injection vulnerability in Python code like cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE username = '" + user_input + "'").
    • DAST Example: A DAST tool might send malformed HTTP requests to a web application to identify Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities.
  • Impact Analysis: Quantifying the potential business and technical consequences of a successful cyberattack. This involves assessing factors like data exfiltration volume, system downtime duration, reputational damage, and regulatory penalties.
    • Technical Impact Metrics: Mean Time To Detect (MTTD), Mean Time To Respond (MTTR), data loss magnitude (e.g., number of records, PII classification), system availability degradation (e.g., percentage of downtime).

• Defense-in-Depth (Layered Security): The CSF advocates for multiple, overlapping security controls. This architectural principle ensures that the failure of a single control does not lead to a complete compromise. Technical examples include:

  • Network Firewalls: Stateful packet inspection (SPI) and next-generation firewall (NGFW) capabilities, including deep packet inspection (DPI) and application awareness.
    • Packet Field Example (TCP Header): A firewall might inspect the SYN flag in the TCP header to block unsolicited incoming connection attempts.
  • Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS): Signature-based detection (matching against known attack patterns) and anomaly-based detection (identifying deviations from normal behavior).
    • Signature Example (Snort Rule): alert tcp any any -> any 80 (msg:"ET WEB_SPECIFIC_APPS Apache Struts RCE Attempt"; flow:established,to_server; content:"/struts2-showcase/showcase.action"; http_uri; content:"?redirect:"; fastpath; http_client_body; content:"%{(#_='multipart/form-data')..."; classtype:web-application-attack; sid:2018903; rev:2;)
  • Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Solutions: Agent-based monitoring of endpoint processes, network connections, file system activity, and registry changes.
    • Telemetry Example (Process Execution): EDR might log ProcessCreate events with details like ProcessName: powershell.exe, ParentProcessName: explorer.exe, CommandLine: "powershell.exe -enc <base64_encoded_script>".
  • Application Security Gateways (e.g., WAFs): Inspecting HTTP/S traffic for web-specific attacks like SQL injection, XSS, and command injection.
    • Protocol Snippet (HTTP Request with XSS Payload): GET /search?q=<script>alert('XSS')</script> HTTP/1.1
  • Strong Authentication Mechanisms: Kerberos, OAuth 2.0, SAML, and hardware security modules (HSMs).
  • Data Encryption: TLS/SSL for data in transit, AES-256 for data at rest (e.g., full disk encryption, database encryption).

• Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) Alignment: While not a direct CSF component, ZTA principles are highly complementary. The CSF's emphasis on granular access control, continuous monitoring, and identity verification aligns with ZTA's core tenet of "never trust, always verify."

  • Technical ZTA Implementation: Micro-segmentation using Software-Defined Networking (SDN) or host-based firewalls, strict Identity and Access Management (IAM) with least privilege and attribute-based access control (ABAC), continuous authentication and authorization checks, and comprehensive logging for behavioral analytics and threat hunting.
    • Attribute Example for ABAC: User.Role == "Developer" AND Device.SecurityPosture == "Compliant" AND Resource.Classification == "Confidential"

• Cyber Resilience: The CSF promotes an organization's ability to anticipate, withstand, recover from, and adapt to adverse cyber conditions. This involves proactive planning, robust backup strategies, and well-defined disaster recovery (DR) and business continuity (BC) plans.

  • Technical Resilience Measures: Immutable backups, geographically dispersed data centers, automated failover mechanisms, regular DR testing with defined RTO (Recovery Time Objective) and RPO (Recovery Point Objective).

Key Informative References:

The CSF draws heavily from existing authoritative standards, making their understanding critical for deep implementation:

• NIST SP 800-53 (Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations): A comprehensive catalog of security and privacy controls. CSF Subcategories often map directly to specific control families and individual controls within SP 800-53.
  • Example Mapping: CSF Subcategory PR.PT-03 (Network Segmentation) maps to SP 800-53 control SC-7 (System and Communications Protection - Boundary Protection) and its enhancements, such as SC-7(11) (Network Segmentation). This control requires implementing security mechanisms at the boundaries of systems and networks to protect systems from unauthorized access and to prevent unauthorized disclosure of information.
• ISO/IEC 27001: An international standard for Information Security Management Systems (ISMS), providing a framework for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an ISMS.
• COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies): A framework from ISACA for IT governance and management.
• ANSI/ISA-62443: A series of standards for the security of Industrial Automation and Control Systems (IACS), crucial for Operational Technology (OT) environments.
• CIS Controls (Center for Internet Security): A prioritized set of actionable cybersecurity best practices.

3) Internal Mechanics / Architecture Details

The CSF is structured hierarchically, providing increasing levels of detail. CSF 2.0 introduces the Govern function, expanding the core to six.

3.1) CSF Core

The CSF Core is the foundational element, comprising Functions, Categories, and Subcategories.

• Functions: The highest-level organizational structure, representing broad cybersecurity outcomes.

  • Govern (GV): (New in CSF 2.0) "The organization's cybersecurity risk management strategy, expectations, and policy are established, communicated, and monitored." This function provides strategic direction and oversight, ensuring that cybersecurity activities are aligned with organizational objectives and risk appetite.
  • Identify (ID): "Develop the organizational understanding to manage cybersecurity risk to systems, assets, data, and capabilities." Focuses on asset management, risk assessment, and supply chain risk. This includes understanding the data flow and dependencies within complex systems.
  • Protect (PR): "Develop and implement the appropriate safeguards to ensure delivery of critical infrastructure services." Focuses on access control, data security, protective technology, and maintenance. This function is heavily reliant on implementing robust technical controls.
  • Detect (DE): "Develop and implement the appropriate activities to identify the occurrence of a cybersecurity event." Focuses on continuous monitoring, anomaly detection, and security event analysis. This requires sophisticated logging and analysis capabilities.
  • Respond (RS): "Develop and implement the appropriate activities to take action regarding a detected cybersecurity incident." Focuses on incident response planning, communication, analysis, mitigation, and improvements. This involves defined playbooks and automated response mechanisms.
  • Recover (RC): "Develop and implement the appropriate activities to maintain resilience and to restore any capabilities or services that were impaired due to a cybersecurity incident." Focuses on recovery planning, improvements, and communications. This is critical for business continuity.

• Categories: Subdivisions of Functions, representing specific cybersecurity outcomes. There are 22 Categories across the six Functions.

  • Example: Under the Protect (PR) Function, Categories include PR.AC (Access Control), PR.DS (Data Security), PR.PT (Protective Technology), and PR.MA (Maintenance). Each category represents a distinct domain of security controls.

• Subcategories: The most granular level, representing specific cybersecurity practices or outcomes. CSF 2.0 includes 106 Subcategories, each linked to "Informative References."

  • Example:
    • Function: Detect (DE)
    • Category: DE.CM (Security Continuous Monitoring)
    • Subcategory: DE.CM-01 - "Security continuous monitoring is employed to identify cybersecurity events."
      • Informative References: NIST SP 800-53 AU-6 (Audit Record Generation), SI-4 (Information System Monitoring), ISO 27001 A.12.4 (Monitoring and Auditing). These references provide detailed guidance on implementing effective monitoring mechanisms.

• Implementation Examples: CSF 2.0 provides concrete, illustrative examples for each subcategory to aid understanding and implementation. These examples are crucial for translating the framework's abstract requirements into tangible technical solutions.

  • Example for DE.CM-01: "Deploying a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system to collect and correlate logs from critical servers, network devices, and endpoints." This involves configuring log forwarding, parsing, and creating correlation rules within the SIEM.

3.2) Organizational Profiles

Organizational Profiles describe an organization's current and target cybersecurity posture against the CSF Core. They are essential for gap analysis and strategic planning.

• Current Profile: A snapshot of the organization's existing cybersecurity outcomes and practices.
  • Technical Application: This involves an inventory of deployed security controls, documented policies, operational procedures, and their alignment with CSF Subcategories. GRC (Governance, Risk, and Compliance) platforms can facilitate this assessment by mapping existing controls to CSF requirements. This might involve automated discovery of assets and security configurations.
• Target Profile: The desired future state of the organization's cybersecurity outcomes, aligned with business objectives and risk appetite.
  • Technical Application: Based on risk assessments, threat intelligence, and strategic goals, the Target Profile sets specific objectives for each CSF Subcategory. This might involve adopting new technologies (e.g., advanced EDR, threat intelligence platforms), enhancing existing ones, or revising security policies and procedures. The target profile should be measurable and actionable.
• Profile Creation & Gap Analysis:
  1. Define Scope: Identify the organizational assets, systems, and processes to be covered. This includes understanding the attack surface and critical business functions.
  2. Assess Current State: Document existing security controls, policies, and capabilities. This often involves technical audits, penetration tests, and configuration reviews.
  3. Define Target State: Establish desired outcomes based on risk tolerance and business requirements. This involves setting specific security metrics and performance indicators.
  4. Gap Analysis: Identify discrepancies between the Current and Target Profiles. This highlights areas requiring improvement.
  5. Action Plan: Develop a prioritized roadmap to close identified gaps, allocating resources and timelines. This plan should include specific technical tasks and project management elements.

3.3) Tiers

CSF Tiers characterize the degree of rigor and sophistication with which an organization manages its cybersecurity risk. They provide context for the Organizational Profiles and are crucial for understanding the maturity of security practices.

• Tier 1: Partial: Risk management is ad-hoc and reactive. Controls are inconsistently applied.
  • Technical Indicator: Absence of formal risk assessments, reliance on individual knowledge, manual and infrequent security operations, lack of documented procedures, and limited logging.
• Tier 2: Risk Informed: Risk management processes are understood and approved, with controls implemented based on risk assessments. Application may be inconsistent.
  • Technical Indicator: Documented policies exist, but enforcement and monitoring are uneven. Basic vulnerability scanning is performed periodically. Some automated security tools are in place but not fully integrated or optimized.
• Tier 3: Repeatable: Risk management practices are explicitly defined, approved, communicated, and enforced. Controls are consistently applied across the organization.
  • Technical Indicator: Mature security operations center (SOC), regular security awareness training, consistent patching, established incident response playbooks, and defined security metrics. Automated security workflows are common.
• Tier 4: Adaptive: Risk management practices are continuously improved based on lessons learned and predictive analysis. The organization proactively adapts to evolving threats.
  • Technical Indicator: Advanced threat hunting, integration of machine learning for anomaly detection, automated incident response, and a culture of continuous security improvement driven by data analytics. Security is embedded into the development lifecycle (DevSecOps).

Example of Tier Application (Subcategory DE.AE-03: Security Alerts):

• Tier 1: Alerts are generated sporadically, often with high false positive rates, and are handled manually and inconsistently. No formal alert triage process.
• Tier 2: Basic alerting mechanisms are in place, but correlation and prioritization are limited. Alerts are reviewed periodically by IT staff, often leading to delays.
• Tier 3: A SIEM system is used to correlate alerts from multiple sources. Defined incident response procedures are followed for high-severity alerts, with dedicated SOC analysts. Alerting thresholds are tuned.
• Tier 4: Real-time, context-aware alerting with automated enrichment and initial triage. Machine learning models predict potential threats, and automated response playbooks are triggered for specific alert types, such as isolating an infected endpoint.

4) Practical Technical Examples

This section provides concrete technical examples illustrating how CSF components translate into actionable implementations.

4.1) Example: Implementing PR.AC-1 (Access Control Policy and Procedures)

• CSF Subcategory: PR.AC-1 - Access control policy and procedures are established and communicated.
• Technical Implementation:
  • Formal Policy Document: A written policy defining principles like least privilege, separation of duties, need-to-know, and regular access reviews. This policy should be version-controlled and accessible to all relevant personnel.
  • Identity and Access Management (IAM) Systems: Implementing robust IAM solutions for centralized user provisioning, deprovisioning, and authentication. This includes Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions.
    • Example (Conceptual IAM Policy - JSON for an API Gateway):

      {
        "policyId": "api-gateway-user-access",
        "description": "Grants read access to user profiles for authenticated users.",
        "principals": ["authenticated_user"],
        "resources": ["/api/v1/users/{userId}"],
        "actions": ["GET"],
        "effect": "Allow",
        "conditions": [
          {
            "key": "request.headers.Authorization",
            "operator": "startsWith",
            "value": "Bearer "
          },
          {
            "key": "request.path.userId",
            "operator": "equals",
            "value": "request.auth.sub" // User can only access their own profile
          }
        ]
      }

  • Principle of Least Privilege in Practice:
    • Example (Bash - File Permissions for a Web Server User):

      WEB_USER="www-data"
      APP_DIR="/var/www/myapp"
      CONFIG_DIR="/etc/myapp"
      
      # Ensure application directory is owned by the web server user and group
      chown -R ${WEB_USER}:${WEB_USER} ${APP_DIR}
      # Set restrictive permissions for application files
      find ${APP_DIR} -type f -exec chmod 640 {} \;
      find ${APP_DIR} -type d -exec chmod 750 {} \;
      
      # Secure configuration files - only readable by root and the web server user
      chown root:${WEB_USER} ${CONFIG_DIR}/secrets.yml
      chmod 640 ${CONFIG_DIR}/secrets.yml
      echo "Principle of least privilege applied to application files and configurations."

    • Example (Container Security - Kubernetes RBAC for a Service Account):

      apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
      kind: Role
      metadata:
        namespace: default
        name: deployment-manager-role
      rules:
      - apiGroups: ["apps"]
        resources: ["deployments", "replicasets"]
        verbs: ["get", "list", "watch", "create", "update", "patch", "delete"]
      ---
      apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1
      kind: RoleBinding
      metadata:
        name: deployment-manager-binding
        namespace: default
      subjects:
      - kind: ServiceAccount
        name: deployment-manager-sa
        namespace: default
      roleRef:
        kind: Role
        name: deployment-manager-role
        apiGroup: rbac.authorization.k8s.io

  • Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Enforcing MFA for all privileged access, remote access, and sensitive data access.
    • Protocol Snippet (SAML 2.0 with MFA - Conceptual Flow):
      1. User attempts to access a Service Provider (SP).
      2. SP redirects user to Identity Provider (IdP).
      3. IdP authenticates user with primary credentials (e.g., password).
      4. IdP prompts for a second factor (e.g., TOTP code from an authenticator app).
      5. Upon successful MFA, IdP generates a SAML Assertion containing user attributes and authentication context (including MFA assurance level).
      6. IdP posts the SAML Assertion to the SP.
      7. SP validates the Assertion and grants access.

4.2) Example: Implementing DE.CM-01 (Security Continuous Monitoring)

• CSF Subcategory: DE.CM-01 - Security continuous monitoring is employed to identify cybersecurity events.
• Technical Implementation:
  • SIEM Deployment & Configuration: Centralized log aggregation and analysis platform (e.g., Splunk, ELK Stack, QRadar). This requires robust log forwarding mechanisms (e.g., Syslog-NG, Filebeat, Fluentd) and efficient data parsing.
  • Log Sources:
    • Network traffic logs (NetFlow, firewall logs, VPC flow logs).
    • Authentication logs (Active Directory Security Event Logs, RADIUS logs, SSH logs).
    • System logs (Linux syslog, Windows Event Logs: Security, System, Application).
    • Application logs (web server access/error logs, database audit logs).
    • Cloud audit logs (AWS CloudTrail, Azure Activity Logs, GCP Audit Logs).
    • IDS/IPS alerts (e.g., Suricata, Snort).
    • EDR telemetry (process execution, network connections, file modifications).
    • Container orchestration logs (Kubernetes audit logs).
  • Correlation Rules & Threat Detection: Defining rules to identify suspicious patterns.
    • Example (Splunk SPL - Detecting Brute-Force Login Attempts on SSH):

      index=linux_auth sourcetype=auth_log (message="Failed password" OR message="authentication failure")
      | stats count by src_ip, user
      | where count >= 5
      | table src_ip, user, count
      | join src_ip [search index=network_logs sourcetype=firewall_logs | rename src_ip as src_ip_net | table src_ip_net]
      | eval "Source IP" = src_ip_net
      | table _time, src_ip, user, count, "Source IP"
      | rename src_ip as "Internal IP", count as "Failed Attempts"

    • Example (ELK Stack - Elasticsearch Query DSL for Suspicious Process Execution):

      {
        "query": {
          "bool": {
            "must": [
              { "match": { "process.name": "powershell.exe" } },
              { "wildcard": { "process.command_line": "*IEX(New-Object Net.WebClient).DownloadString(*" } }
            ],
            "filter": [
              { "range": { "@timestamp": { "gte": "now-1h" } } }
            ]
          }
        }
      }

  • Network Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (NIDS/NIPS): Using tools like Suricata or Zeek (Bro) to analyze network traffic in real-time.
    • Example (Suricata Rule - Detecting SMB EternalBlue exploit attempt):

      # Detect SMB EternalBlue exploit attempt (MS17-010)
      alert smb any any -> $HOME_NET 445 (msg:"ET EXPLOIT Possible MS17-010 EternalBlue SMB Exploit Attempt (SMBv1)"; flow:to_server,established; content:"|00 00 00 00|"; depth:4; offset:0; byte_test:1,>,0,1; content:"|FF|SMB"; offset:3; depth:4; content:"|71 00|"; offset:33; depth:2; content:"|00 00|"; offset:35; depth:2; content:"|00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

Source

• Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIST_Cybersecurity_Framework
• Wikipedia API endpoint: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php
• AI enriched at: 2026-03-30T23:53:49.826Z