Cyber Risk Is a Governance Issue

Cybersecurity tools and services address technical execution. Frameworks describe practices. Compliance checks boxes.

None of these establish who owns cyber risk, how it is governed, or how decisions are defended when outcomes are challenged.

As regulators, insurers, courts, and investors increasingly evaluate leadership accountability, organizations face a growing gap between operational security and fiduciary responsibility.

That gap is not technical. It is governance.

Praesidium Governance, Inc. operates in the white space between cybersecurity execution and fiduciary accountability.

This layer determines:

• Who owns cyber risk at the leadership level
• How risk is escalated and decided
• What evidence demonstrates informed oversight
• How decisions are documented and defended over time

Praesidium defines and stewards Cyber Risk Governance & Accountability (CRGA™) - an independent governance category focused on oversight, accountability, and defensibility rather than tools or services.

This governance layer persists regardless of vendors, technologies, or operational partners.

Praesidium is not a cybersecurity vendor, managed service provider, or certification body.

Its role is to:

• Establish governance architecture and accountability models
• Create board-ratified governance artifacts and evidence standards
• Preserve independence between governance authority and execution delivery

By separating governance from execution, Praesidium enables boards and executives to govern cyber risk with clarity and credibility - while allowing operational partners to focus on delivery.