Certified - CompTIA CYSA+

Welcome to Episode One Hundred Twenty-Nine of your CYSA Plus Prep cast. In this episode, we explore one of the most valuable yet often underutilized phases of incident response: conducting structured lessons learned sessions and post-mortem reviews. These sessions allow organizations to reflect on what occurred, how the response unfolded, what went well, and what can be improved. They offer a unique opportunity to turn disruption into growth by capturing insight, driving process improvement, and reinforcing best practices. A well-run lessons learned session helps teams identify procedural weaknesses, refine response protocols, and strengthen both technical and organizational resilience. For cybersecurity professionals, knowing how to plan, conduct, and follow through on these reviews is essential for improving incident response maturity and preparing for future threats. These reviews are also a key area of emphasis in the CYSA Plus exam and should be part of every organization's continuous improvement strategy.
Lessons learned sessions should be scheduled promptly after the closure of a cybersecurity incident. Delays in scheduling reduce the accuracy of participant recollection and limit the effectiveness of the session. Ideally, the session is held within a few days of the incident’s resolution while details remain fresh and stakeholders are still engaged. Participants should include cybersecurity analysts, incident responders, IT administrators, communication leads, and any other individuals who played a role in detection, containment, or recovery. The goal is to assemble a complete picture of the incident from every angle.
The session must follow a structured agenda. This ensures a comprehensive and consistent review that addresses all phases of incident response. The facilitator should guide the group through detection, containment, eradication, recovery, and communication. Each phase should be evaluated in terms of what went according to plan, what failed or was delayed, and what improvements can be made. Structured agendas help focus the conversation, prevent digressions, and allow participants to contribute meaningfully without losing track of the objective.
A neutral facilitator is critical to the success of the session. The facilitator's role is to encourage open, honest dialogue in a nonjudgmental setting. Team members should feel safe sharing mistakes, gaps, or concerns without fear of blame or reprisal. The focus is on identifying processes or decisions that can be improved, not assigning fault to individuals. Creating a culture of learning and transparency is vital for capturing accurate information and generating practical recommendations.
Comprehensive documentation is essential throughout the lessons learned session. Analysts must capture detailed notes on what occurred, when it happened, who was involved, what decisions were made, and what challenges were encountered. Timelines should be reconstructed, communication logs reviewed, and any deviations from policy or playbooks noted. Capturing this level of detail supports later analysis and ensures that insights can be shared across the organization and referenced during audits or future incidents.
Key incident metrics should also be reviewed and discussed. These include Mean Time to Detect, Mean Time to Respond, and Mean Time to Remediate. Reviewing these metrics provides a measurable view of performance and highlights where delays may have occurred. Comparing these metrics against predefined targets or previous incidents helps track organizational progress and justify resource allocation for improvement initiatives.
Lessons learned sessions must also revisit the root causes and vulnerabilities identified during the incident investigation. These may include technical weaknesses such as unpatched software or misconfigured systems, as well as procedural issues such as gaps in training or unclear escalation paths. Each root cause should be tied to a specific action item, such as improving patch management, updating policies, or conducting focused training. This ensures that the lessons learned translate into concrete improvements rather than remaining abstract.
Communication during the incident should also be reviewed in detail. This includes internal coordination, executive updates, stakeholder communication, and public statements. The session should evaluate whether communication was timely, accurate, and consistent. Any confusion, delays, or mixed messages should be documented, and recommendations should be made to improve templates, approval workflows, or communication channels. Strong communication is often the difference between a well-managed incident and a chaotic response.
Best practices and successful strategies should also be highlighted. If the team responded quickly, used automation effectively, or executed containment smoothly, these achievements should be acknowledged and captured. Recognizing what went well reinforces positive behavior, boosts morale, and helps replicate successful techniques during future incidents. These positive takeaways are just as important as identifying gaps or challenges.
Lessons learned sessions should also evaluate team readiness. Were team members properly trained? Did they understand their roles? Were procedures followed correctly? If knowledge or skill gaps are identified, the session should recommend new training initiatives, policy clarifications, or workflow updates. Addressing preparedness gaps improves incident response capacity and supports broader organizational resilience.
All outcomes from the session must be documented clearly and completely. This includes recommendations, responsible parties, timelines, and defined success criteria. Documentation should be distributed to all relevant stakeholders and integrated into organizational planning processes. Without formal documentation, even the most insightful discussions can be forgotten or ignored. A well-documented lessons learned report becomes a blueprint for ongoing improvement and institutional memory.
For more cyber related content and books, please check out cyberauthor.me. Also, there are more security courses on Cybersecurity and more at Baremetalcyber.com.
Post-mortem findings must be explicitly integrated into organizational procedures and documentation. This includes revising the incident response plan to reflect lessons learned, updating vulnerability management processes to close identified gaps, and refining security monitoring rules to better detect similar threats in the future. By incorporating insights from each incident, organizations turn reactive responses into proactive improvements. These updates ensure that teams are better equipped for future events and that the response process evolves in line with real-world challenges.
Incident response playbooks should be one of the first documents reviewed in light of post-mortem outcomes. Playbooks serve as operational guides, and if they contain steps that proved ineffective or unclear during the incident, those sections must be corrected. This may involve adding new escalation triggers, removing redundant procedures, or clarifying team responsibilities. Updating playbooks ensures that the same mistakes are not repeated and that future responses benefit from institutional learning.
Post-mortem recommendations often highlight areas where additional investments are needed. These might include new detection tools, improved endpoint security, enhanced backup systems, or staff training platforms. Documenting these needs clearly in the post-mortem report supports effective budgeting and resource allocation. When recommendations are aligned with specific incident findings, it is easier for security leaders to justify the expenses to executives and ensure that security initiatives are prioritized appropriately.
Following a lessons learned session, corrective actions must be validated. This includes confirming that patches were applied, configurations were updated, and processes were modified. Validation might involve follow-up audits, test exercises, or security assessments. These efforts confirm that the recommended improvements were not only planned but actually implemented, and that they address the original problem effectively. Ongoing validation ensures that remediation efforts have lasting value.
Training and awareness initiatives should also be adjusted based on post-mortem outcomes. If the incident revealed gaps in user knowledge, inconsistent adherence to policy, or procedural confusion, those issues should be addressed in future training. These adjustments might involve updating online training modules, conducting targeted workshops, or creating new job aids for specific roles. Ensuring that users understand their responsibilities and can respond appropriately strengthens the human layer of defense.
Communicating post-mortem findings to executive leadership is critical. These leaders control budgets, influence culture, and set organizational priorities. A clear and concise summary of what happened, what was learned, and what is being done to improve equips leaders to make informed decisions. Presenting these findings in business terms—such as risk reduction, compliance alignment, and operational continuity—helps secure executive buy-in and supports ongoing security investments.
Risk management practices should also be updated using post-mortem insights. Incidents often reveal unrecognized risks, underestimated threats, or misaligned prioritization. By incorporating real-world evidence into the risk register, security teams can improve the accuracy of future assessments. This might involve reclassifying existing risks, adding new ones, or modifying mitigation strategies. Aligning risk assessments with incident realities ensures that the organization focuses on its most pressing vulnerabilities.
Post-mortem reports are also valuable for improving internal coordination. Documenting how teams interacted, how handoffs were managed, and how communication channels performed allows organizations to streamline future responses. This may include clarifying who has authority during specific phases of the incident, defining escalation pathways, or optimizing the structure of response teams. Better coordination reduces confusion, accelerates containment, and improves overall efficiency.
Follow-up reviews should be scheduled regularly to track progress on post-mortem recommendations. These reviews ensure that assigned tasks are being completed, that accountability is maintained, and that improvements are yielding the expected benefits. Without follow-up, it is easy for corrective actions to be deprioritized or forgotten over time. By revisiting the action plan, organizations demonstrate their commitment to continuous improvement and avoid the risk of repeat incidents.
Finally, the lessons learned and post-mortem process itself must be continuously refined. This involves reviewing how sessions are conducted, updating facilitator training, enhancing documentation templates, and incorporating feedback from participants. As threats evolve and organizational structures change, the process of capturing and applying lessons must also adapt. Investing in this evolution helps maintain the relevance, effectiveness, and impact of every session.
To summarize Episode One Hundred Twenty-Nine, lessons learned sessions and post-mortems are critical tools for building organizational maturity. They transform incidents from reactive events into opportunities for reflection, analysis, and growth. By systematically reviewing what happened, why it happened, and how to prevent it from happening again, organizations build stronger defenses, improve processes, and enhance collaboration. These sessions are not just retrospective exercises—they are strategic investments in future resilience and long-term cybersecurity success.