Simplified Iec Risk Assessment Calculator 11: A Practical Guide for Lightning Protection Installers

ISO 12100:2010 specifies basic terminology, principles and a methodology for achieving safety in the design of machinery. It specifies principles of risk assessment and risk reduction to help designers in achieving this objective. These principles are based on knowledge and experience of the design, use, incidents, accidents and risks associated with machinery. Procedures are described for identifying hazards and estimating and evaluating risks during relevant phases of the machine life cycle, and for the elimination of hazards or sufficient risk reduction. Guidance is given on the documentation and verification of the risk assessment and risk reduction process.

What actually are risk assessment and treatment, and what is their purpose? Risk assessment is a process during which an organization should identify information security risks and determine their likelihood and impact. Plainly speaking, the organization should recognize all the potential problems with their information, how likely they are to occur, and what the consequences might be.

Simplified Iec Risk Assessment Calculator 11

Download Zip

To conclude: risk assessment and treatment really are the foundations of information security / ISO 27001, but that does not mean they have to be complicated. You can do it in a simple way, and your common sense is what really counts.

However, for smaller companies, the price of such tools could be an obstacle, though in my opinion an even bigger barrier is the fact that such tools are sometimes too complex for smaller companies. In other words, the time needed to learn to work with such a tool is usually much longer than it would take to handle dozens of Excel sheets. Not to mention that such tools usually require you to follow overly complex risk assessment methodology, which could be overkill for smaller companies.

The last option is probably the easiest from the perspective of the coordinator, but the problem is that the information gathered this way will be of low quality. If the risk assessment process is not very clear to you, be certain that it will be even less clear to other employees in your company, no matter how nice your written explanation is.

To make your risk assessment easier, you can use a sheet or software that will list assets, threats, and vulnerabilities in columns; you should also include some other information like risk ID, risk owners, impact and likelihood, etc.

I personally like this assets-threats-vulnerabilities methodology quite a bit, because I think it gives a good balance between doing the risk assessment quickly, and at the same time doing it both systematically and detailed enough so that one can pinpoint where the potential security problem is.

The purpose of risk treatment seems rather simple: to control the risks identified during the risk assessment; in most cases, this would mean to decrease the risk by reducing the likelihood of an incident (e.g., by using nonflammable building materials), and/or to reduce the impact on assets (e.g., by using automatic fire-suppression systems).

Before starting your implementation process, you should be aware of unacceptable risks from the risk assessment, but also your available budget for the current year, because sometimes the controls will require an investment.

If you choose to measure residual risks, i.e., the risks that will remain after you apply the controls, it should be done together with the responsible persons in each department. You have to show these people which treatment options you have planned for, and based on this information, and using the same scales as for the risk assessment, assess the residual risk for every unacceptable risk identified earlier during risk assessment.

So, for instance, if you had identified a consequence of level 4 and likelihood of level 5 during your risk assessment (which would mean risk of 9 by the method of addition), your residual risk may be 5 if you assessed that the consequence would lower to 3 and likelihood to 2 due to, e.g., safeguards you planned to implement.

Sometimes companies perform gap analysis before the start of ISO 27001 implementation, in order to get a feel for where they are right now, and to find out which resources they will need to employ in order to implement ISO 27001. However, the usefulness of such approach is doubtful, since only risk assessment will show the real extent of what needs to be implemented and in which form.

So, I would say that one of the main differences is in the mindset: risk assessment is thinking about the (potential) things that could happen in the future, while the internal audit is dealing with how things were done in the past.

The second major difference is that the internal audit focuses on compliance with various rules and requirements, while risk assessment is nothing but analysis that provides a basis for building up certain rules.

If you are implementing ISO 27001, or especially ISO 22301, for the first time, you are probably puzzled by the risk assessment and business impact analysis. What is their purpose? How are they different? Can they be performed at the same time?

To put it briefly, risk assessment will show you which kinds of incidents you might face, while business impact analysis will show you how quickly you need to recover your activities from incidents to avoid larger damage.

The purpose of this assessment is to systematically find out which incidents can happen to your organization, and then through the process of risk treatment to prepare in order to minimize the damage of such incidents.

In the risk assessment process, one common question asked by organizations is whether to go with a quantitative or a qualitative approach. The good news is that you can use the easier approach (qualitative approach) and be fully compliant with ISO 27001; you can also use both approaches if you want to take a step forward in making your risk assessment highly advanced.

Since it has little mathematical dependency (risk may be calculated through a simple sum, multiplication, or other form of non-mathematical combination of probability and consequence values), qualitative risk assessment is easy and quick to perform.

On the other hand, quantitative risk assessment focuses on factual and measurable data to calculate probability and impact values, normally expressing risk values in monetary terms, which makes its results useful outside the context of the assessment (loss of money is understandable for any business unit). To reach a monetary result, quantitative risk assessment often makes use of these concepts:

By relying on factual and measurable data, quantitative risk assessment has as its main benefits the presentation of very precise results about risk value, and the maximum investment that would make risk treatment worthwhile, so that it is profitable for the organization. Below is an example of how risk values are calculated through quantitative risk assessment:

As you may notice, qualitative and quantitative assessments have specific characteristics that make each one better for a specific risk assessment scenario, but in the big picture, combining both approaches can prove to be the best alternative for a risk assessment process.

If your company needs quick and easy risk assessment, you can go with qualitative assessment (and this is what 99% of the companies do). However, if you need to make some really big investment that is critical for security, perhaps it makes sense to invest time and money into quantitative risk assessment.

In short, by adopting a combined approach considering the information and time response needed, and data and knowledge available, you can enhance the effectiveness of the ISO 27001 information security risk assessment process, and also take a step further from what the standard requires.

However, if you would like to use a different approach that can take the most advantage of the situation and the available information, your organization can consider some other approaches to risk identification and make your risk assessment more advanced.

The Bee-REX model is a screening level tool that is intended for use in a Tier I risk assessment to assess exposures of bees to pesticides and to calculate risk quotients. This model is individual-based, and is not intended to assess exposures and effects at the colony-level (i.e., for honey bees).

Describes data sources used in exposure and risk assessment of occupational pesticide handlers (i.e., mixer/loaders and applicators). Includes the "Occupational Pesticide Handler Unit Exposure Surrogate Reference Table". View information about OPHED.

Once the management team is engaged and committed to supporting the CSMS, it is important to perform a risk assessment. Risk assessment is part of the overall risk management strategy of every company and it is a mandatory step to create a solid and efficient cybersecurity strategy. It requires correlation and collaboration between many different groups of people within the company. These levels have been defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) at the organization, mission/business processes, and information system (IT and ICS) levels.[11][13]

To perform a risk assessment of the ICS, it is necessary to define the scope and boundaries of the system that will be assessed, also known as the System under Consideration (SuC). Once the SuC is defined, it is necessary to systematically identify, analyze the threats and vulnerabilities, and prioritize the risks based on their potential consequences. At the same time, it is also important to define asset criticality and dependencies to the operation.[9]

There are two different types of risk assessments applicable to ICS: high level and detailed risk assessments. As their names suggest, one approach deals primarily with high-level concepts and the other involves a detailed look at the different types of risk. It is common to perform a high-level risk assessment to support the business rationale and business case, with the latter performing a detailed risk assessment to ensure the system has specific countermeasures included in the design.[4][9][10][13][14] 2ff7e9595c