Go to Top

Go to Top

Three Ways to Respond to Security Transitions Thumbnail
Three Ways to Respond to Security Transitions Thumbnail
Three Ways to Respond to Security Transitions Thumbnail
Three Ways to Respond to Security Transitions Thumbnail

Security Insights

Security Insights

Security Insights

How to Prepare

How to Prepare

How to Prepare

EnkiWhiteHat

EnkiWhiteHat

Jan 20, 2026

Jan 20, 2026

Jan 20, 2026

Content

Content

Content

From 2026, the three shifts in security are no longer a matter of choice. The mandatory disclosure of information protection, the strengthening of the effectiveness of the Information Security Management System (ISMS · ISMS-P), and the changes in the evaluation indicators of cybersecurity in government and public institutions each target different subjects, but they all point in the same direction. 

"It is not about form but substance, not words but evidence, not fixed standards but evolving responses." So, what exactly should organizations prepare for?

1. Responding to Mandatory Information Security Disclosure: "Speak with Numbers and Evidence"

While information security disclosures will be fully implemented starting in 2027, preparation must begin now. Disclosure is not solely the responsibility of the security team. It is a company-wide task that requires the cooperation of management, the legal team, and the PR/IR team.

Firstly, we need to map our company's security assets. It's necessary to clearly identify what our most critical systems are, where and how customer data is stored, and the potential impact on the company if breached. If you don't know where the vault is or how many entrance doors there are, you can't defend it. The starting point of disclosure is accurately understanding "what we need to protect."

Secondly, security data should be managed like financial data. If the budget is scattered across the finance team, manpower with HR, training with the education team, and incident response with the security team, the narrative changes with each disclosure. In 2026, the task is to create a ‘security ledger (single framework).’ We need to consolidate and regularly update information such as "how many security personnel we have this year, the budget amount, the number of trainings, vulnerability assessment coverage, and response time in case of incidents" in one place. 

Investments in security should be detailed, recorded, and managed. The Ministry of Science and ICT has announced the subdivision of investment activities, asking for clear details on "how and on what" the money was spent, not just "how much was spent." Investments in personnel, equipment, services, and education should be separately managed, and explanations for year-over-year changes should be provided.

Thirdly, disclosure statements should be transformed into ‘evidence-based statements.’ A statement like “we are safe” is risky. Instead, use a flow of activity–standard–evidence–improvement such as “we regularly inspect, take actions based on certain standards, and integrate the results into improvements.” Such a structure not only persuades investors but also responds to regulations.
Now, it's not just about having ‘done security,’ but about documenting ‘how it was done.’ 

Instead of saying "we are doing well in security," leave specific evidence such as "47 vulnerabilities found in Q3; 42 resolved," "conducted 4 penetration tests annually; reports filed," and "security training for employees quarterly; 94% attendance." Disclosure is not packaging but data. 

Fourthly, it is not the sole work of the security team. Disclosure is an official company announcement. A collaborative structure is needed where management decides budgets, the legal team interprets regulations, the PR/IR team drafts disclosure documents, and the IT/security team provides technical data. Just as firefighters aren't the only ones who handle fire responses, security should also be seen as a company-wide task.

Conducting a mock disclosure by 2026 is a realistic method. By drafting a trial run and having finance, legal, IR, and security verify it together, the risk of doing a ‘first-time disclosure’ in 2027 is significantly reduced. This is because disclosure is not an announcement but a ‘verified record.’

2. Enhancing ISMS·ISMS-P Effectiveness: "Prepare for On-Site Verification"

As the ISMS·ISMS-P certification shifts from being "document-centered" to "on-site demonstration + cancellation upon incidents," the preparation approach needs to completely change. The key to strengthening effectiveness ultimately demands eliminating the gap between ‘documents and reality.’ Therefore, responses should be based on “actual operations” rather than a checklist.

In preliminary reviews, key items are pre-verified, and in the main review, technical review and on-site demonstration are enhanced, and in case of an incident, the certification may be canceled after a special post-review.

First, the Zero Trust principle needs to be applied to the actual system. The principle is "Trust no one, always verify." Internal users should not be automatically trusted. Continuously verify who is accessing which system and monitor for any unusual signs. However, declaring a principle doesn't automatically change the system. The gap between policies written on paper and the actual site must be reduced.

Offensive security should be conducted regularly. Offensive security is about "hacking ourselves before hackers do." White hackers attempt to infiltrate the system like real attackers, uncovering issues like "Why has this server patch been delayed for years?" and "Whose account is this, and does it still have admin rights?" Such mock hacking goes beyond identifying technical vulnerabilities to provide evidence of management responsibility, proving "We have proactively prepared as much as we could."

Exposure Management must be introduced. A system is needed to constantly check what the weaknesses of our organization are, how we appear from the outside, and where attackers might target first. Repeated training should be conducted before real attacks occur, using regular mock hacking, red team activities, and some automated tools. There is a significant difference between saying "We've done our best" after an incident and showing records like "Conducted regular mock hacking 4 times a year, discovered 42 vulnerabilities, resolved 39."

Now, AI must also be managed as a security target. Though the incidents in 2025 were shocking, experts warn "this is just the beginning." An era is coming where AI becomes the engine driving the entire attack operation. In an environment where AI agents handle inventory management, reconciliation, customer consulting, and code deployment, a single misjudgment or manipulation by an attacker could sequentially impact logistics, production lines, and accounting systems. AI agents, like humans, need unique IDs and minimal privileges, with records of their actions, and tasks with significant financial or data implications should be finally verified by humans.

3. Responding to Changes in Cybersecurity Evaluation Indicators for Government and Public Institutions: 'Do you have security operational capabilities?' rather than 'Network separation'

The government public institution cybersecurity evaluation in 2026 is essentially an “operational security assessment.” Therefore, instead of increasing documentation to improve scores, organizations should focus on changing operations to naturally improve their scores.

First, budgets, training, and disaster plans should be moved from year-end events to quarterly operations. It’s important not just to secure a budget but to clarify “how it was spent”; not just to conduct training but to show “what was improved”; and not just to establish disaster plans but to ensure they “function.” The key here is ‘regularity.’ Training should occur quarterly, and results from training should lead to actual policy and setting changes.

Second, the transition to N2SF needs to be established as an ‘operational standard,’ not a ‘project’. We have reached an era where merely splitting networks is not enough. Institutions need to progressively implement elements such as access control, section control, and data flow control from an N2SF perspective and leave documentation of the processes and outcomes. The important aspect here is not “perfection at once,” but a step-by-step transition roadmap and achievements.

Third, MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication) must be ‘actually’ applied to core systems. MFA cannot be introduced just with documentation. It should significantly increase the application rate starting with access management, remote access, approval/financial/personnel, and personal information processing systems, ensuring that exceptions and operational convenience do not create security gaps.

Fourth, items that could earn bonus points (disaster recovery, AI-based control, N2SF, training participation) should not be viewed as optional but rather as factors that create distinctions. If institutions adopt AI not as ‘work automation’ but as a ‘tool for security operations,’ they can simultaneously enhance operational efficiency and scores.

The 2026 evaluation criteria overhaul will look at “not whether the network is segmented, but how safely the connected environment is controlled.” As the existing network separation implementation item transitions to an N2SF application item (worth 5.5 points), it will assess whether the structure allows for access control, authentication, recording, and information flow management rather than simple blocking.

Private companies can gain insights from the changes in the government public institution evaluation criteria. The enhancement of “budgets, training, recovery, and policy transitions” suggests a market trend toward viewing companies similarly. Particularly with the onset of public disclosure, firms will need to demonstrate not only “how much they blocked” but also “how quickly they recover from incidents and prevent recurrence.” This flow of evaluation becomes a universal managerial language applicable to the private sector as well.

Operate security and verify

Even though these three may seem like different systems, the answer that the organization must provide is one. 

“We are operating security, and that operation is provable.”
The year 2026 is not a year of regulatory changes, but a year when the 'language' of security changes. It is summarized as transparency, effectiveness, and resilience. 

Security is elevated from being “a field hidden and hard to see” to management information that the market and the public can verify. The expansion of disclosures symbolizes this. 

The standard shifts from “Having certification means it's okay” to whether the certification operates in the field and if it can be immediately inspected and remedied in case of an incident. Strengthening the effectiveness of ISMS and ISMS-P clarifies this direction. 

As attacks accelerate with AI and automation, detection and blocking alone may be too late. Thus, resilience encompassing “pre-incident preparation and post-incident recovery” with budget, training, disaster plans, recovery, N2SF, and MFA is needed. 

It is a period of transition from security communicated through documents to security communicated through data and operational records. 

For prepared organizations, this change is not a burden but an opportunity. Only organizations that can show trust with numbers and evidence will remain as “trustworthy places” in the face of the market and the public. 

The year 2026 is not “a year of studying the changed regulations,” but a year of transitioning to the operational methods required by the changed regulations. The core of this change is not to intimidate companies and government agencies but to redesign the framework so that companies and agencies that reduce incidents and minimize damage, and maintain trust are fairly evaluated.

EnkiWhiteHat

EnkiWhiteHat

가천대 스타트업 컬리지 겸임교수
가천대 스타트업 컬리지 겸임교수

Offensive security experts delivering deeper security through an attacker's perspective.

Offensive security experts delivering deeper security through an attacker's perspective.

The Beginning of Flawless Security System, From the Expertise of the No.1 White Hacker

Prepare Before a Security Incident Occurs

The Beginning of Flawless Security System, From the Expertise of the No.1 White Hacker

Prepare Before a Security Incident Occurs

The Beginning of Flawless Security System, From the Expertise of the No.1 White Hacker

Prepare Before a Security Incident Occurs

Copyright © 2025. ENKI WhiteHat Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2025. ENKI WhiteHat Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2025. ENKI WhiteHat Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.