NIST Updates Cybersecurity Framework (CSF)
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.18.17
Last week, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a draft update to the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure, also known as the “Cybersecurity Framework” or CSF. This Version 1.1 update includes (i) a new section addressing measurement and demonstration of cybersecurity; (ii) considerations regarding Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) added throughout the CSF; and (iii) clarification of existing key terms and concepts.
The proposed additions regarding cybersecurity measurement are intended to “get the conversation started” and help companies map their business outcomes to their cyber risk management practices. The update aims to enable organizations to produce meaningful cyber risk information to use in enterprise-level risk management decisions, which can also be conveyed to dependents, partners and customers as applicable. Supply chain-focused updates are intended to bolster existing sections of the CSF as well as develop a common vocabulary for cyber supply chain risk management across industries and project types.
Version 1.1 of the CSF is intended to be “fully compatible” with the existing Version 1.0. Comments on Version 1.1 must be submitted by April 10, 2017, and NIST intends to publish a final Framework Version 1.1 in the fall of 2017.
Contacts

Partner and Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
