How to interpret NIS 2 requirements at Foundation level

Start with definitions and intent, then connect each requirement to a program element such as governance, risk, controls, or operations. Keep scope and evidence in mind as you interpret.

Interpreting NIS 2 requirements at Foundation level is about building a consistent reading method. The first step is to start from definitions. Many misunderstandings come from using everyday meanings for terms that have a specific regulatory intent. A disciplined approach begins by clarifying what the directive means and ensuring the team uses the same language.

The second step is to identify intent. A requirement usually exists to reduce risk, increase resilience, or standardize expectations across entities. Understanding intent prevents overly narrow interpretations that focus on a single control while missing the broader program expectation.

Next, connect the requirement to a cybersecurity program element. At Foundation level, a practical taxonomy includes governance, asset and risk thinking, security controls, incident and crisis readiness, communication and awareness, and performance monitoring. Placing a requirement into one of these areas helps you determine which teams are involved and what types of deliverables are expected.

Scope is critical. Interpretation must consider organizational context: which services and systems are in scope, what dependencies exist, and what constitutes a critical impact. Even in a Foundation course, the habit of documenting scope assumptions is important because it shapes future implementation decisions.

Finally, think about evidence. Requirements are not only “done” when a document exists; they are “done” when an organization can show the requirement is implemented and maintained. Evidence can include policies, procedures, training records, test results, and operational logs. Practicing interpretation through case exercises helps develop this habit and prepares participants for the exam, which evaluates reasoning patterns rather than deep technical detail.

Related Information

  • Definitions provide the base for consistent interpretation.
  • Intent clarifies what the requirement is trying to achieve.
  • Mapping to program elements helps assign ownership.
  • Scope assumptions should be documented early.
  • Evidence thinking supports maintainable compliance.

Expert Insight

Teams tend to interpret requirements as single artifacts: one policy, one control, one checklist. This is rarely sufficient. A more reliable method is to ask what operating behavior the requirement expects and how that behavior is proven. This mindset improves both compliance and operational maturity.

Case study work is valuable because it forces explicit assumptions. When assumptions remain implicit, teams disagree later. When they are made explicit, alignment becomes easier and the program becomes easier to manage.

Interpretation is a method: definitions, intent, scope, and evidence.

Expert Trainer

Expert Trainer

Topics

NIS 2interpretationrequirementsscopeevidenceFoundationmethod

We use cookies to improve your experience

Necessary cookies are always active. You can accept, reject non-essential cookies, or customize your preferences.