Get an IAM Assessment

Microsoft Entra releases and announcements Summarize this article for me In this article This article provides information about the latest releases and change announcements across the Microsoft Entra family of products over the last six months (updated monthly). If you’re looking for information that’s older than six months, see: Archive for.

This new quick-start guide illustrates practical and actionable ways AI could be used for analyzing, planning, implementing, and monitoring an organization’s progress toward achieving CSF 2.0 outcomes.

The document’s purpose is to:

  • Provide structured AI prompts as tools for practitioners to begin creating CSF-related artifacts in support of achieving CSF outcomes
  • Identify current state of practice for AI prompt engineering in CSF implementation and analysis

While the focus was not to write about AI best practices or to provide cybersecurity guidelines thereof, there are places where specific precautions are denoted with the /! notation. 

This guide includes three notional use cases, examples of prompts for structuring natural language inputs to produce specified CSF 2.0 outputs from a generative AI model, simulated organizational files for a fictitious company, tips for getting started, and more.

  • USE CASE 1 illustrates the use of an AI-assisted review to evaluate organization cybersecurity policy, strategy, and risk governance in alignment with the CSF 2.0 outcomes.
  • USE CASE 2 illustrates how to produce a draft Organization Current State Profile – mapping artifacts and personnel interview notes to CSF 2.0 outcomes, documenting any assumptions, and recording observed gaps in the interviews and evidence.
  • USE CASE 3 illustrates how to draw upon internal and industry references to create a draft CSF target state profile describing desired outcomes to meet mission objectives, stakeholder expectations, address the risk landscape, and fulfill requirements.

Use case examples illustrate a possible approach and are not prescriptive assessment or assurance methodologies. 

Submit Your Comments:

The comment period is open through October 15, 2026, at 11:59 PM. Email comments to: csf@nist.gov. 

Note: NIST is only seeking comments on the quick-start guide and supplied AI prompts. NIST is not seeking comment on the fictional organizational documents. Those are for illustrative purposes only.

This publication is the most recent within a portfolio of CSF 2.0 quick-start guides released by the CSF 2.0 project team since February 26, 2024. These resources offer tailored pathways for different audiences to engage with the CSF 2.0, making the Framework easier to implement. View all CSF 2.0 quick-start guides.

 

NIST Internal Report (IR) 8613 ipd (initial public draft), Multi-Cloud Architecture Challenges, identifies, categorizes, and analyzes the security and compliance challenges that are unique to or significantly amplified by multi-cloud architectures. This analysis by the NIST Multi-Cloud Security Public Working Group (MCSPWG) addresses security and Authorization to Operate (ATO) challenges and highlights areas where additional community research could meaningfully reduce risk.

The MCSPWG identified 23 consolidated challenge areas that represent novel friction points and architectural misalignments that emerge when orchestrating control across autonomous cloud silos. The most significant structural challenge areas are:

  • Security-significant differences in cloud-native services across providers
  • Organizational logistics and staffing complexity across heterogeneous environments
  • Difficulty in implementing centralized security capabilities across provider boundaries

These structural gaps are most acute in five areas: (1) identity and access management, (2) telemetry and logging, (3) configuration and change management, (4) data protection, and (5) compliance and authorization.

Submit Your Comments:

NIST invites input from federal agencies, industry partners, researchers, and the broader cybersecurity community. The public comment period is open through October 5, 2026.

How to Participate:

Email your completed template to ir8613-comments@nist.gov with the subject line “NIST.IR.8613 Comments.”

    Storage technology has evolved in two primary directions: (1) increased media storage capacity and (2) architectural changes that provide a software-based abstraction over all forms of background storage technologies. However, the latter evolution has increased management complexity and the probability of configuration errors and associated security threats. This document traces the evolution of the storage technology landscape and analyzes current security threats and resultant risks to provide a comprehensive set of security recommendations in the form of storage security controls. 

    Important updates in this revision of SP 800-209 include:

    • Section 2 — Removal of content associated with obsolete and/or proprietary technologies.
    • Section 3 — Completely revised to primarily focus on threats and risks that are specific to storage systems and ecosystems. References to other NIST publications are provided for generic ICT threats and risks. Two notable focus areas were also added:
      • “Platform Security Compromises” — Focuses on threats associated with the underlying/supporting infrastructure for data storage
      • “Compromised Data Resilience/Protection” — Focuses on threats to secondary data assets and the secondary data asset generation process (i.e., backups)
    • Section 4 — Retitled as “Storage Security Controls.” The security recommendations have been reorganized from nine categories into seven formalized control families with standardized control acronyms.
      • Several new control families have been added, and some existing controls have been consolidated under new control families to provide coverage for all threats and risks covered in previous sections.
    • Appendix C — Added to provide a complete list of the storage security controls described in Sec. 4 as well as a mapping of mitigating controls for the storage-oriented threats identified in Sec. 3.

    NOTE: A call for patent claims is included in this draft. For additional information, see the Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) Patent Policy – Inclusion of Patents in ITL Publications.