Knowledge is Power
BARE METAL CYBERKnowledge is Power

Sitewide Search

Search Bare Metal Cyber

Search exact control and technique identifiers, Cyber Wiki articles, framework records, playbooks, books, podcasts, Academy courses, individual lessons, and BMC Cyber Challenge activities.

NIST CSF Category profileIntermediate

Improvement (ID.IM) — NIST CSF 2.0 Category

Use ID.IM to manage learning from evaluations, tests, exercises, operations, incidents, and plan execution within the Identify Function.

Framework mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

CSF 2.0
CategoryID.IM — Improvement
FunctionID — IdentifyCategoryID.IM — Improvement
Official CSF Core outcome

Improvements to organizational cybersecurity risk management processes, procedures, and activities are identified across all CSF Functions.

CSF outcomes describe what an organization may seek to achieve. They do not prescribe one implementation or turn the Core into a universal checklist.

Category outcome

NIST CSF 2.0 places Improvement (ID.IM) within the Identify Function. The official Category outcome is: “Improvements to organizational cybersecurity risk management processes, procedures, and activities are identified across all CSF Functions.”

This Category provides a structured way to address learning from evaluations, tests, exercises, operations, incidents, and plan execution. It groups related Subcategory outcomes without prescribing a specific technology, organizational model, or implementation sequence.

What this means in practice

A credible Improvement capability connects policy and risk decisions to repeatable operating practices. The organization should define scope, ownership, expected outcomes, evidence, exceptions, and reassessment triggers.

Implementation should be proportionate to mission needs, legal and contractual obligations, threat exposure, business impact, and the organization’s risk appetite. The same Category may be implemented differently across systems and business contexts.

Implementation priorities

The following priorities translate the Category into an operating capability. They are starting points for design and governance, not a replacement for architecture, procedures, or risk analysis.

  • Collect improvement opportunities from assessments, exercises, incidents, operations, and user feedback.
  • Prioritize improvements by risk reduction, feasibility, dependencies, and urgency.
  • Assign owners, resources, measures, and target dates.
  • Update plans, procedures, controls, and training based on lessons learned.
  • Verify that completed changes improve the intended outcome.

Evidence and measurement

Evidence should show that the Category’s outcomes are achieved in the intended scope, remain effective, and are reviewed when conditions change. A policy, tool purchase, or completed checklist is not sufficient by itself.

  • Assessment, exercise, and after-action findings
  • Corrective-action and improvement backlogs
  • Updated plans, procedures, controls, and training materials
  • Ownership, due dates, and closure records
  • Effectiveness checks after implementation

Subcategories within ID.IM

This Category contains 4 CSF 2.0 Subcategory outcomes. Each outcome has a dedicated Bare Metal Cyber profile with the official NIST statement and original implementation guidance.

  • ID.IM-01 — Improvements from Evaluations: Improvements are identified from evaluations
  • ID.IM-02 — Improvements from Tests and Exercises: Improvements are identified from security tests and exercises, including those done in coordination with suppliers and relevant third parties
  • ID.IM-03 — Improvements from Operations: Improvements are identified from execution of operational processes, procedures, and activities
  • ID.IM-04 — Improve Incident Response and Cybersecurity Plans: Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans that affect operations are established, communicated, maintained, and improved

Using this Category in Current and Target Profiles

For a Current Profile, record which Subcategory outcomes are achieved, the scope of the assessment, and the evidence supporting the judgment. For a Target Profile, select the outcomes needed to meet risk management objectives and describe the target conditions.

Prioritize the resulting gaps by mission consequence, risk exposure, dependencies, obligations, implementation effort, and the value of the improvement. Record the owner and the evidence that will demonstrate closure.

Common failure modes

The following conditions can create the appearance of coverage without reliable outcome achievement. Treat them as hypotheses to test during assessments, exercises, and operational reviews.

  • Lessons are documented but not converted into owned work.
  • Improvements are prioritized by visibility rather than risk.
  • Plans are updated without testing the changed process.
  • The organization closes findings without verifying outcome improvement.

Source, scope, and attribution

The Category identifier, name, description, and Subcategory outcomes are from NIST CSWP 29. Bare Metal Cyber’s implementation, evidence, failure-mode, and Profile guidance is original educational material.

The CSF describes outcomes, not mandatory implementation steps. Use NIST’s current online Implementation Examples and Informative References when selecting practices and controls for a specific environment.

Certification relevance

This subject appears in or supports the following certification bodies of knowledge:

NIST CSF 2.0CompTIA Security+ISC2 CISSPISACA CRISC

Authoritative sources