Cybersecurity can feel overwhelming for packaging manufacturers because of the endless tools, vendors, regulations, acronyms, and risks to consider. For executives and plant leaders, the challenge is often not whether cybersecurity matters. It is knowing where to start and how to prioritize.

That is where cybersecurity frameworks can help.

Two of the most useful frameworks are the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, often called NIST CSF, and the CIS Controls. They are sometimes discussed separately, but for manufacturers, they work best together, with NIST CSF providing the strategic structure and CIS Controls providing the operational execution path.

Together, they can help packaging manufacturers build a practical cybersecurity program that supports business continuity, risk management, and operational resilience.

Why Frameworks Matter

A cybersecurity framework gives the organization a common language.

This is important because cybersecurity touches many groups, including leadership, IT, operations, plant management, finance, insurers, auditors, suppliers, and sometimes customers.

Without a shared framework, cybersecurity conversations can become fragmented. Technical teams may talk about tools. Executives may talk about business risk. Auditors may ask for evidence. Insurers may ask for controls. Plant leaders may focus on uptime.

A framework connects those conversations and helps the company answer:

  • What are our biggest risks?
  • Which systems matter most?
  • What controls do we already have?
  • Where are the gaps?
  • Who owns improvement?
  • How do we prove progress?

For packaging manufacturers, this is especially useful because cyber risk is not limited to corporate IT. It also includes production systems, vendor access, remote support, scheduling, ERP, MES, plant floor systems, and backup recovery.

NIST CSF: The Strategic Layer

NIST CSF is useful because it organizes cybersecurity into six major functions that create a business-friendly structure for understanding cybersecurity maturity.

  1. Govern: focuses on strategy, ownership, policy, and risk management.
  2. Identify: focuses on knowing what systems, assets, suppliers, and dependencies matter most.
  3. Protect: includes controls that reduce the likelihood or impact of an attack, such as multifactor authentication, access management, segmentation, and endpoint protection.
  4. Detect: focuses on identifying suspicious activity before it spreads.
  5. Respond: covers the decisions and actions required during an incident.
  6. Recover: focuses on restoring systems and returning the business to normal operations.

The value of NIST CSF is that it works from the plant floor to the boardroom. It helps leadership understand cybersecurity as a risk and resilience issue, not just a technical checklist.

CIS Controls: The Execution Layer

While NIST CSF is strong strategically, it is not highly prescriptive. It does not always tell a team exactly what to do on Monday morning.

The CIS Controls, on the other hand, provide a prioritized set of safeguards that organizations can use to improve cybersecurity maturity. They are more tactical and execution-oriented and help teams understand which controls to implement and how to approach them in stages.

For a packaging manufacturer, CIS Controls can help guide practical work such as:

  • Inventorying assets
  • Managing accounts
  • Controlling access
  • Securing configurations
  • Protecting endpoints
  • Managing vulnerabilities
  • Testing backups
  • Improving incident response

This makes CIS useful for turning cybersecurity strategy into a remediation backlog with owners, priorities, and evidence.

Why Manufacturers Should Use Both

NIST CSF and CIS Controls are not competing frameworks; they are complementary. NIST CSF helps define the risk model, reporting language, and maturity expectations for the business, while CIS Controls help drive implementation through specific, practical actions.

A practical approach is to use NIST CSF at the top to help leadership understand where the company is exposed and what level of maturity is appropriate, with CIS Controls underneath to help IT, security, and operations teams close the gaps.

This combination is especially valuable when communicating with auditors, insurers, suppliers, and customers. Instead of answering cybersecurity questions from scratch each time, the company can reference a structured program, documented controls, and evidence of progress.

Avoid Checkbox Cybersecurity

One of the biggest mistakes manufacturers make with cybersecurity is treating it like a paperwork exercise. Having a policy on file or completing an assessment may check a box, but it does not necessarily make the business safer. The real goal is to reduce risk in the places where the company is most exposed.

That is why evidence matters. It is one thing to say multifactor authentication is in place. It is much stronger to show where it is actually enforced, including email, VPN, remote access, and administrator accounts. The same is true for backups. Simply saying backups exist does not tell leadership whether the business can recover after an incident. Restore test results, recovery time, and recovery point data give a much clearer picture. Vendor management works the same way. A company should be able to show who has access, what accounts exist, how access is approved, and when it was last reviewed.

Cybersecurity frameworks are useful when they help manufacturers improve real outcomes. They lose value when they become documents that sit on a shelf. The point is not to look compliant on paper, but rather to build a program that can stand up to real-world threats.

Start with the Highest Business Risk

Packaging manufacturers do not need to pursue maximum maturity everywhere. They should focus first on the areas that have the greatest impact on production continuity.

For many manufacturers, that means:

  • Supplier remote access
  • Privileged accounts
  • Critical IT and OT assets
  • Backup and recovery
  • Incident response roles
  • Network segmentation
  • Endpoint protection
  • Visibility into plant systems

The goal is to identify where the business is most exposed and then build a defensible path to improvement.

A Practical Adoption Model

A packaging manufacturer can begin with a simple four-step process.

  1. Use NIST CSF to establish the company’s current cybersecurity profile and target profile.
  2. Identify the gaps that represent the highest business risk.
  3. Map existing controls to CIS Controls and prioritize the most important safeguards.
  4. Create a remediation backlog with owners, timelines, and measurable evidence.

This does not require over-engineering. In many cases, the first version can be lightweight. The important part is to create discipline, ownership, and repeatability.

Progress Matters more than Perfection

Cybersecurity maturity is not built overnight.

The goal is to make steady, measurable progress in the areas that matter most. For packaging manufacturers, the strongest programs are not necessarily the most complex. They are the ones that connect cybersecurity work to business outcomes such as:

  • Can we keep producing?
  • Can we recover quickly?
  • Can we protect customer commitments?
  • Can we prove our controls work?

NIST CSF and CIS Controls provide a practical way to answer those questions. Together, they help manufacturers move from reactive cybersecurity to a more disciplined, risk-based, and business-aligned program.

Take this quick survey to understand your cyber risk and its potential impact.