content_category: None/Other

category_confidence: high

specificity_confidence: high

reasoning: This paragraph only provides a cross-reference to Item 1A risk factors, with no substantive cybersecurity disclosure, qualifying it for the None/Other category.

provider: bytedance-seed

stage: benchmark


content_category: Risk Management Process

reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management practices, including framework-aligned programs to assess and mitigate IT and data security risks, which qualifies as Risk Management Process.


content_category: Strategy Integration

reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks with no incident description, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It only includes boilerplate materiality language and a cross-reference to other sections of the Form 10-K.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality conclusion about cybersecurity risks with no accompanying incident narrative, which falls under the Strategy Integration category. No unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts are present in the text.


reasoning: The paragraph focuses on the company's internal cybersecurity risk assessment and management processes integrated into its enterprise risk management system, qualifying as Risk Management Process. Third-party service provider risks are only a minor component, not the central topic of the disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for identifying, assessing, and mitigating cybersecurity risks, with third-party providers only referenced as supporting components of internal workflows, so Risk Management Process is the correct category.


content_category: Board Governance

reasoning: This paragraph’s central focus is the Board of Directors’ Audit Committee’s oversight of cybersecurity risks, with board committees as the primary grammatical subjects, qualifying it for the Board Governance category.


content_category: Third-Party Risk

reasoning: This paragraph's central topic is security requirements imposed on the company's third-party service providers, which aligns with the Third-Party Risk category. No unique firm-specific facts or recognized named standards are included in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for integrating cybersecurity risk oversight into its enterprise-wide risk management program, including annual risk assessments and quarterly reporting, which falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: The paragraph's grammatical subject is the company's Board, which is the sole focus of all described cybersecurity oversight, incident reporting, and annual review activities, aligning with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks with no incident narrative, internal process descriptions, or firm-specific details, which falls under the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: The paragraph’s core thematic and grammatical subject is the board’s Audit Committee, which performs charter-mandated oversight of the company’s cybersecurity risk management, aligning perfectly with the Board Governance category.


content_category: Management Role

reasoning: The paragraph's core grammatical subject and focus is the company's dedicated cybersecurity management role, the Information Security Officer, including their reporting structure, qualifications, and oversight duties, so it is classified as Management Role.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity processes including incident response planning, risk assessments, and vulnerability monitoring, which falls squarely under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the Board of Directors' core responsibility for cybersecurity risk oversight, including its review of cybersecurity processes and engagement with the cybersecurity lead, aligning perfectly with the Board Governance category. The management role is mentioned to support the board's oversight, not as the primary focus.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity program, protocols, and routine assessment activities, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it describes the company's own internal cyber risk management workflows.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the company’s board of directors and its delegated Audit Committee performing oversight of cybersecurity risks, with board and committee entities as the primary grammatical subjects, which directly fits the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity processes, including vulnerability management, 24/7 monitoring, and incident response planning, making Risk Management Process the correct category. The only qualifying specific fact is the named NIST framework, with no unique firm-specific verifiable details, leading to a Sector-Adapted specificity rating.


reasoning: The paragraph’s main focus is on the company’s cybersecurity-focused management roles, their reporting lines, and internal leadership structure, with only a single brief mention of board oversight, so it falls under the Management Role category.


reasoning: The paragraph's primary grammatical subject is the board's Audit Committee, which oversees the company's cybersecurity risks, fitting the Board Governance category. All language is generic and could be used by any company, with no unique firm-specific details or named standards.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on Stellar Bancorp's internal enterprise risk management program that integrates cybersecurity oversight, policies, and practices, aligning with the Risk Management Process category. Board oversight and the CISO's role are included as components of the company's internal cyber risk governance structure.


reasoning: This paragraph details Alternus's internal cybersecurity risk management practices, including framework adoption, cross-departmental collaboration, and internal policy integration, so it is classified as Risk Management Process. Third-party security firms are only a minor supporting component of these internal processes, so they do not trigger the Third-Party Risk category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk assessment, monitoring, and mitigation processes, with third-party service provider risk discussed only as a component of its broader internal risk framework rather than the central topic, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity preparedness and risk mitigation processes, including incident response planning and employee training, which falls under the Risk Management Process category. All content is generic and could be applied to any company's filing, with no unique firm-specific details.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for developing, maintaining, and reviewing cybersecurity controls and risk assessments, which directly aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses exclusively on materiality assessments of cybersecurity risks, stating that past unspecified incidents did not materially impact the company's operations and current risks are not reasonably likely to have a material effect, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category. No detailed incident narrative, specific board oversight processes, or management role details are present, so no other category applies.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's internal workflows for identifying, assessing, and escalating cybersecurity threats and incidents, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it centers on the company's own internal security processes.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity processes for protecting systems, identifying incidents, and conducting routine security assessments, which fits the Risk Management Process category as it centers on the firm's internal risk mitigation workflows.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the Board of Directors and its Audit Committee overseeing cybersecurity risk management and receiving incident and risk reports from management, with the board as the core grammatical subject, which aligns with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the CIO, a senior management role, as its primary subject, covering the CIO’s responsibilities for cybersecurity reviews, incident response leadership, and reporting to board committees, which aligns with the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph's central focus is the company's CDIO/CISO, a cybersecurity-focused management role, including their qualifications, reporting line, tenure, and oversight of cybersecurity responsibilities, which fits the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management policies, procedures, and controls, with third-party oversight only a minor component of internal processes, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is the board of directors and its audit committee's oversight of cybersecurity risks, with board and committee entities as the main grammatical subjects, qualifying it for Board Governance.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses on materiality assessments of potential cybersecurity threats and their potential adverse business impacts, with no description of an actual incident, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's internal cybersecurity incident detection and response processes, which are the company's own internal risk management workflows, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph's central focus is vendor security oversight and mandatory contractual security requirements imposed on third-party service providers, which aligns with the definition of Third-Party Risk.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on board and board subcommittee oversight of cybersecurity risk, with the board-level Cybersecurity Subcommittee as a core grammatical subject, aligning perfectly with the Board Governance category definition.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the Board and its committees (Audit Committee, new Cybersecurity Risk Subcommittee) as the responsible entities for cybersecurity risk oversight, which aligns with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the qualifications, responsibilities, and reporting lines of the company's cybersecurity management leadership, specifically the Director of IT Infrastructure & Security, which aligns with the Management Role category. The core focus of the text is on the individuals leading the firm's cybersecurity programs rather than the programs themselves.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal employee cybersecurity training and preparedness activities to manage cyber risks, which fits the Risk Management Process category. No other category applies, as there is no discussion of board oversight, active incidents, third-party risk as a central focus, or financial/strategic planning.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's cybersecurity management roles, including the CISO's qualifications, reporting lines, and the Information Security team's oversight of cybersecurity risks, which fits the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only standalone materiality assessments of cybersecurity risks and past immaterial incident expenses, with no detailed incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


content_category: Incident Disclosure

reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed actual cybersecurity incident, including its timing, scope of unauthorized access, and post-incident response actions, which qualifies as Incident Disclosure. The incident narrative is the central focus of the text, with no competing category applying.


reasoning: The entire paragraph centers on the CISO, a cybersecurity-focused management role, detailing their qualifications and core responsibilities, which directly aligns with the Management Role category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the CISO, a senior cybersecurity management role, including their leadership of the internal ISC, professional tenure, and industry certifications, so it is classified as Management Role.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk mitigation processes, tools, and framework alignment, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category as it focuses on the company's own internal risk management practices.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the Board and its Audit Committee's oversight of cybersecurity risk management and incident reporting, which aligns with the Board Governance category. All content consists of generic standard governance language that could be used in any public company's filing, with no unique firm-specific details.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks, which falls under the Strategy Integration category. No detailed incident narrative or other primary cybersecurity governance or process content is presented.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is a materiality assessment of past and future cybersecurity risks, with only a brief mention of a 2020 incident, aligning with the Strategy Integration category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph details Longbridge's internal processes for managing and maintaining its cybersecurity posture, including vulnerability management, threat monitoring, and technology lifecycle updates, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a cross-reference to another filing section and generic forward-looking cybersecurity risk disclaimers with no substantive actionable cybersecurity disclosures, qualifying it for the None/Other category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity evaluation, testing, and training processes, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category. Third-party engagements are a supporting component of these internal processes, not the central topic, so it is not categorized as Third-Party Risk.


reasoning: The paragraph's core focus is describing the company's internal cybersecurity policies, processes, and adoption of a recognized risk management framework to address cyber threats, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category. Brief opening mention of board oversight is not the central topic of the text.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management program and the guiding frameworks used to assess its program, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category. No other core topics like board oversight, incidents, or third-party risk are the central focus of the text.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal processes for assessing and managing cybersecurity risks, which falls under the Risk Management Process category, as it focuses on the company's internal cyber risk mitigation practices with no focus on board governance, incidents, or third-party risk as a central topic.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal enterprise risk management processes that integrate cybersecurity reporting and oversight into its broader business risk control procedures, aligning with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: The paragraph’s primary grammatical subjects are the Board of Directors and its Audit Committee, whose core described activity is oversight of the company’s cybersecurity risks and program, which directly aligns with the Board Governance content category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, unauthorized third-party access, containment actions, and operational disruption, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: The paragraph's central focus is dedicated oversight of third-party cybersecurity risks, including formal requirements, pre-engagement security assessments, and ongoing compliance monitoring, which matches the Third-Party Risk category definition.


reasoning: The paragraph’s primary focus is the company’s CISO, a cybersecurity-focused management role, with details on their qualifications, tenure, and reporting line, which aligns with the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses on the company's internal processes for assessing and managing cybersecurity risks, including adoption of the NIST framework and integration into its Enterprise Risk Management program, which falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its date, unauthorized access details, containment actions, and operational impact, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category criteria.


reasoning: This paragraph details a real cybersecurity incident, including its discovery date, scope of accessed user data, and the company's response actions, which aligns perfectly with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, ongoing cybersecurity incident including its detection date, response actions, and operational impacts, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph details the timeline, scope, and ongoing activity of a real verified cybersecurity incident affecting the company's systems, which directly aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's planned internal cybersecurity risk management program and supporting internal processes, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category focused on the company's own cyber risk oversight and mitigation procedures.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its timeline, scope of affected accounts, and ongoing response and investigative actions, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers entirely on the company's dedicated cybersecurity management role, its responsibilities, qualifications, and reporting structure, which aligns perfectly with the Management Role content category. The minor mention of Audit Committee updates is not the primary focus of the text.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the potential material financial impact and costs of an unspecified incident without describing the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the scope, response actions, and operational impact of a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, so it qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category. The entire text centers on details of the disclosed event with no ambiguity for alternate categorization.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its scope of affected customer data, ongoing investigative efforts, and regulatory interactions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standard forward-looking statements disclaimer with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its timeline, scope of accessed and exfiltrated data, and response actions, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, response actions, and operational disruptions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph describes an actual confirmed cybersecurity incident, including details of data exfiltration, ongoing investigation activities, and client notification steps, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details an actual active cybersecurity incident, including unauthorized system access, data exfiltration, extortion demands, the company's response actions, and potential operational harms, which qualifies it for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including unauthorized system access, operational impacts, data exfiltration, and planned required notifications, which aligns fully with the Incident Disclosure category criteria.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on describing a real cybersecurity incident, including its scope, response actions, and potential impact on customers, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No qualifying unique or verifiable hard facts are present, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed, real cybersecurity incident affecting the company's public website, including its timeline, attack details, and immediate response actions, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details the scope of data compromised in a confirmed cybersecurity incident disclosed in an 8-K Item 1.05 filing, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the material financial impact and insurance coverage of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, so it falls under Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, threat actor actions, the Company's response steps, and operational business impacts, which falls squarely into the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses exclusively on insurance reimbursement for incident-related costs and a materiality assessment of the cybersecurity incident, with no detailed incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. All language in the paragraph is generic and could be used in any company's filing, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, specific cybersecurity incident, including its limited operational impacts and ongoing investigative response efforts, so it qualifies as Incident Disclosure. No unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts are present to elevate its specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed, real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, root cause, response actions, and system restoration timeline, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. The description of the event is the central focus, with no competing primary topic.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its timing, attacker actions, operational impacts, and ongoing containment and remediation efforts, which qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its timeline, scope of compromised systems, and executed response actions, which fits the Incident Disclosure category. There is no ambiguity that this is a direct disclosure of a specific security event.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection timeline, containment actions, investigation steps, and law enforcement coordination, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the material financial and operational impact of a referenced cybersecurity incident, including its expected negative effect on Q2 2024 earnings, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category as it does not describe the incident's details or internal cybersecurity processes.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its discovery date, unauthorized access event, containment efforts, and temporary operational disruption, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively covers the material operational and financial impact of an incident, associated recovery costs, and cybersecurity insurance coverage, with no description of the underlying incident event, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is disclosing the estimated costs and material financial impact of the resolved cybersecurity incident, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category per classification rules.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively covers the financial impact and preliminary cost estimates of a cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the materiality and expected financial impact of a referenced cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It aligns with the tiebreaker rule that assigns Strategy Integration to content that only addresses financial and materiality impacts of an incident without describing the event.


reasoning: This paragraph details the timeline, operational disruptions, and remediation actions taken in response to a confirmed actual cybersecurity incident, fitting the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the operational impacts, residual effects, and system restoration progress of a confirmed cybersecurity incident affecting VF's retail and supply chain operations, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real-world cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, response actions, operational impact, and scope of system access, which aligns perfectly with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real ransomware incident, including its timing, origin, investigation status, and post-incident system improvements, so it qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including its detection, containment and response actions, ongoing investigation, and operational impacts, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure. No unique, verifiable firm-specific facts are included in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its date, affected systems, and operational disruptions to the Company, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, immediate response actions, network isolation, and operational impact, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed, real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, unauthorized access to company systems, and initial response actions, which meets the requirements for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident affecting the company, including the timing of discovery, nature of unauthorized access, and the company's immediate response actions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively addresses financial arrangements to fund cybersecurity incident remediation, including a covenant waiver and $3.7M in added capital, which falls under Strategy Integration as it covers the financial/budgetary impact of a cybersecurity event without describing the incident itself.


reasoning: This paragraph details an active ongoing cybersecurity incident, including its ongoing investigation, law enforcement and regulatory notifications, and preliminary material impact assessment, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No unique firm-specific or quantifiable verifiable facts are present, earning a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, ongoing cybersecurity incident, including unauthorized access to company systems, potential data exfiltration, and completed and planned response actions to address the event, so it qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively details financial and revenue impacts of a prior cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, so it aligns with the Strategy Integration category per tiebreaker rules.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real-world cybersecurity incident, including its timing, scope of affected internal and third-party systems, and current restoration status, which qualifies as Incident Disclosure. The classification is unambiguous as the entire text focuses on documenting the event's details.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the board of directors and its delegated audit committee's oversight of cybersecurity risk, which aligns with the Board Governance category. All content uses only standard, generic governance language with no firm-specific details.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management and compliance activities, so it is categorized as Risk Management Process. No unique or verifiable firm-specific facts are present, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, ongoing cybersecurity incident affecting the company’s operations, outlines mitigation and investigation efforts, and clarifies the scope of impacted systems, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph is solely a cross-reference to the Form 10-K's risk factors section, containing no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it is categorized as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, affected system scope, and response actions, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for integrating cybersecurity risk into its broader enterprise risk management framework, so it falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph only presents materiality assessments of past cybersecurity incidents and related costs, with no narrative describing any specific incident, so it qualifies as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on a named company management leader and his cybersecurity-related responsibilities, so it falls under the Management Role category as the grammatical subject is a management role holder.


reasoning: This paragraph details a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident including its detection timing, geographic scope of impact, and immediate response actions, which directly qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category. It exclusively describes the active incident rather than governance, internal processes, or third-party risk.


reasoning: This paragraph provides a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks with no incident narrative or substantive operational, governance, or process disclosures, aligning with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's dedicated cybersecurity and IT leadership roles, their qualifications, and their responsibilities for leading the firm's cybersecurity efforts, which aligns with the Management Role category, as management roles are the primary subject. The classification is unambiguous.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the internal cross-functional program for assessing, escalating, and managing cybersecurity threats and incidents, which falls under Risk Management Process as it covers the company's internal cyber risk management workflows.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on a management role (the CFO) holding primary responsibility for cybersecurity risk management and its reporting structure, which aligns with the Management Role category.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the board's Audit Committee as the primary body responsible for overseeing the company's cybersecurity risks, which aligns with the Board Governance category, as the board committee is the core grammatical and thematic subject of the text. The content contains no unique firm-specific details, only standard governance language that could be used in any public company's filing.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cyber risk identification, assessment, and mitigation workflows, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category, as it focuses exclusively on the company's internal cybersecurity risk management practices.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses on materiality assessments of past cybersecurity risks and an update to the Bank's information security strategy, with no detailed incident narrative or other category-specific core topic, aligning with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: The paragraph's core focus is the company's Chief Technology Officer, a management role, including their cybersecurity-specific responsibilities, qualifications, and internal reporting cadence, which aligns perfectly with the Management Role category. No competing category applies, as the paragraph does not center on board oversight, internal risk processes, or other non-management topics.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for integrating cybersecurity into its broader enterprise risk management systems, matching the Risk Management Process category. Third-party risk is only a minor component, not the central topic, so no other category applies.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the Board of Directors and its Enterprise Risk Management Committee's cybersecurity oversight activities, including policy approvals, reporting cadences, and board training, which aligns perfectly with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity incident escalation, mitigation, and remediation processes, which fall squarely under the Risk Management Process category as it describes internal security procedures.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses cybersecurity risk materiality, cyber insurance costs, and general resource expenditure, aligning with the Strategy Integration category which covers business/financial impact assessments and materiality conclusions for cyber risks.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk mitigation processes, including employee training, network penetration testing, and periodic risk assessments, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes HPE's internal organizational structure and processes for identifying, assessing, and mitigating cybersecurity risks, which directly aligns with the Risk Management Process category. The core focus is the company's in-house program for managing cyber threats, with no other category being more applicable.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity risk management process that uses third-party experts as a supporting component, rather than centering on vendor oversight, so it is classified as Risk Management Process. No central focus on managing third-party vendor risks, so it does not qualify for the Third-Party Risk category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses exclusively on the CISO and CTO, two management roles responsible for the company's cybersecurity and technology operations, detailing their tenure, qualifications, and experience, so it is classified as Management Role.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal process of embedding cybersecurity risk management into cross-level business decision-making and enterprise risk management workflows, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal processes for assessing and managing cybersecurity risks, which falls under the Risk Management Process category. No unique firm-specific facts or named industry frameworks are included, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only standalone materiality conclusions about cybersecurity incidents, with no detailed incident narrative, so it qualifies as Strategy Integration. It includes a cross-reference to further risk factor disclosures, aligning with the category's scope of materiality assessments.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, including integration into its enterprise risk management framework and use of industry cybersecurity standards, so it falls under Risk Management Process. Board oversight is only a brief lead-in, not the core topic.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity incident response processes, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category. Third-party security providers are only a minor component of the internal plan, so the central topic remains the company's own internal risk management practices rather than third-party risk.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on QuinStreet's internal cybersecurity risk management program, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as the core topic is the company's own internal processes for managing cyber risks. Vendors are only referenced as a component of internal policies, so they are not the central focus.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the Board of Directors assigning cybersecurity risk oversight responsibility to its Audit Committee, making Board Governance the correct category as the board and its committee are the primary subjects of the cyber oversight disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cross-functional processes for managing cybersecurity risks, incident escalation, and threat mitigation, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category as it focuses solely on the company's internal risk governance workflows.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on a specific management role responsible for cybersecurity risk oversight, including the role holder's qualifications and internal reporting lines, which aligns with the Management Role category definition.


reasoning: This paragraph only contains a cross-reference to another section of the Form 10-K with no substantive cybersecurity disclosure, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is on the cybersecurity-focused management roles of CISO and CTO, including their reporting lines and core responsibilities, which aligns with the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph presents a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks, with no incident narrative or description of internal governance or processes, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the Company's Board of Directors establishing a dedicated board-level Cybersecurity Committee to oversee cybersecurity risks, with the board as the primary subject, which aligns with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph's grammatical subjects are the company's Audit Committee and full Board of Directors, which are the primary entities discussed in relation to cybersecurity oversight, briefings, and continuing education, fitting the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity control testing and program alignment practices, which fall under internal risk management processes. Third-party providers are only a tool used to execute these internal processes, so Third-Party Risk is not the correct classification as vendors are not the central topic.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the qualifications and tenures of two company management roles with cybersecurity oversight responsibilities, making the Management Role category the clear fit.


reasoning: The paragraph primarily details management's responsibilities for cybersecurity, including naming the specific executive leading the company's cybersecurity program, with only brief mention of board oversight, so it is classified as Management Role.


reasoning: The entire paragraph's central focus is oversight and risk mitigation for third-party vendors, suppliers, and business partners, which aligns with the Third-Party Risk category. No unique firm-specific facts or named cybersecurity standards are included, so the disclosure is generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the Board of Directors and its designated Audit Committee's oversight of cybersecurity risks, with the board and its committee as the primary grammatical and topical subjects, aligning perfectly with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: The paragraph focuses on the company's IT management team, detailing its responsibility for cybersecurity risk oversight, its qualifications, and its reporting structure, which aligns with the Management Role content category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, which include third-party service provider risk assessments as a component of its broader internal risk framework, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal internal audit process that includes evaluating cybersecurity risks as part of annual business risk assessments, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category for covering internal risk evaluation activities. No unique or verifiable firm-specific facts are included, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks with no accompanying incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes Aramark's internal cybersecurity risk management activities, including using external firms to support crisis preparedness and security operations, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as third-party support is a component of internal processes rather than the central focus.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is board and board committee oversight of cybersecurity risk, which aligns with the Board Governance category. All details are standard generic governance language with no firm-unique or standard-specific qualifying facts.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on board-level oversight of cybersecurity risks, with the Board and its standard Audit Committee as the core subjects, aligning with the Board Governance category. No unique firm-specific details are included, so it is generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph addresses the Company's cybersecurity insurance and potential material adverse impacts of unmitigated cyber incidents, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category. It includes a cross-reference to further cybersecurity risk discussion in Item 1A of the filing.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for assessing, identifying, and managing cybersecurity risks, which are integrated into its enterprise risk management program, so it qualifies for the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management activities, including standard security tooling, routine testing exercises, and employee training, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it describes the company's internal risk mitigation processes.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes that assess and mitigate cyber threats as part of its overall enterprise risk strategy, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category. Board oversight is only a brief contextual mention, not the primary focus of the text.


category_confidence: medium

reasoning: This paragraph discusses the potential material adverse operational and financial impact of cybersecurity risks, as well as the company's need to allocate resources to cybersecurity, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category for cybersecurity disclosures.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk mitigation processes and controls, which qualifies for the Risk Management Process category as it focuses on internal core risk management activities with no focus on other category themes.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal adoption of a cybersecurity framework and policy alignment with regulatory requirements, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it covers core internal cyber risk governance activities.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's internal cybersecurity risk mitigation processes and controls, so it is classified as Risk Management Process; vendor risk management is only a minor component of the broader internal processes, not the central topic.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, including its enterprise-wide vulnerability assessment program, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category for internal risk mitigation practices.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal security monitoring, incident severity assessment, and triage processes, which qualify as internal cybersecurity risk management procedures, so it is assigned to the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for preventing, detecting, and escalating cybersecurity incidents, which qualifies as an internal risk management process.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively presents a materiality conclusion for a referenced cybersecurity incident with no detailed incident narrative, aligning with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real-world cybersecurity incident, including the scope of exfiltrated data and ongoing response actions, which qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed actual cybersecurity incident, including its detection date and the company's immediate response, containment, and investigation steps, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its detection, containment, and remediation actions, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's Director of Cybersecurity, a dedicated cybersecurity management role, covering their responsibilities, professional experience, and internal reporting lines, which aligns with the Management Role category definition.


reasoning: This paragraph only evaluates the material operational and financial impact of an ongoing cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, so it falls under the Strategy Integration category. It contains no unique firm-specific facts, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its discovery date, unauthorized system access by a threat actor, and the Company's immediate response actions, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks with no incident narrative, aligning with the Strategy Integration category; third-party oversight is only a passing mention, not the central focus of the disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively addresses the financial and operational materiality, incurred costs, and secondary risks of a cybersecurity incident without describing the event itself, fitting the Strategy Integration category criteria.


reasoning: This paragraph details response actions taken to contain a confirmed cybersecurity incident and outlines the incident's limited scope of impact, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph primarily covers the company's internal cybersecurity preparedness processes, including business continuity, disaster recovery, and incident response plan testing, which fits the Risk Management Process category, with a secondary mention of cyber insurance.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, response activation, and containment, which qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph is exclusively a standard forward-looking statements disclaimer with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it falls under the None/Other content category.


reasoning: This paragraph details preliminary findings from an ongoing investigation into a confirmed cybersecurity incident, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the operational scope, impact, and ongoing recovery of a confirmed cybersecurity incident, which falls squarely into the Incident Disclosure category per the classification rules.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the material financial and operational impact of an ongoing cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's specific details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It only contains standard boilerplate materiality language with no substantive incident narrative.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, identified cybersecurity incident, including detection, initial containment and remediation steps, and a specific date of response action, which qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively covers the material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident on the company's Q2 2024 earnings, with no description of the incident itself, so it falls under Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, ongoing cybersecurity incident, including its timeline, scope of unauthorized activity, and the company's investigation and remediation actions, which qualifies it for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph only presents a standalone materiality conclusion for a cybersecurity incident with no supporting incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It contains no firm-unique or verifiable details to elevate its specificity beyond generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including its discovery timeline, unauthorized access details, and the company's immediate response actions, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details an active, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its operational impacts on company functions, evidence of exfiltrated files, and ongoing investigative actions, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the material financial impact and associated risks of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, fitting the Strategy Integration category. It contains no unique or verifiable hard facts, so it qualifies as Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes details of a real, active cybersecurity incident, including law enforcement coordination and incident data status, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses financial impacts, cyber insurance coverage, and materiality of a cybersecurity incident without describing the event itself, aligning with the Strategy Integration category criteria.


reasoning: This paragraph details the scope of an active, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including the volume of compromised consumer data and limits on sensitive information at risk, which qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details response actions taken in response to a confirmed cybersecurity incident, meeting the criteria for Incident Disclosure. No unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts are included, so it qualifies as generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses the financial and revenue impact of a prior cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident event itself, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the scope of data exfiltrated during a confirmed cybersecurity incident, which falls exclusively under the Incident Disclosure category as it details the scope of a real active incident.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses the material financial and operational impacts of a referenced cybersecurity incident, without describing the incident's details, so it qualifies as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph details the scope of data compromised in a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including the types of affected information and the internal business unit that maintained the data, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the scope, ongoing restoration, and response actions of a confirmed cybersecurity incident, which falls squarely into the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its detection, response actions, and a specific implementation date for system isolation, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real ransomware incident, including its occurrence date, initial containment and response actions, and planned regulatory and stakeholder notifications, so it qualifies as Incident Disclosure. The entire text centers on detailing this actual event, with no ambiguous categorization possible.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed, real cybersecurity incident, including its discovery date, timeline of unauthorized access and data exfiltration, and scope of affected customer records, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes an ongoing real cybersecurity incident, including investigation into the scope of unauthorized access, exfiltrated files, and potential required regulatory filings, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively covers the financial costs and material financial/operational impact of a cybersecurity incident, with no detailed incident narrative, so it falls under Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, unauthorized access details, response actions, and operational impact, which exclusively fits the Incident Disclosure category. The paragraph centers entirely on narrating the actual event, with no competing category requirements met.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standard forward-looking statements disclaimer with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph details an actual, discovered cybersecurity incident with its discovery date and initial response actions, which meets the criteria for Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the material operational and financial impact of a referenced cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, which qualifies for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including its discovery date, unauthorized access event, and the company's response actions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph details the narrative of a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including the threat actor's unauthorized actions and resulting impacts, which directly aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. The core focus of the paragraph is describing the confirmed security event, with no competing content that would shift it to another category.


reasoning: This paragraph only provides a materiality assessment of the referenced cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category. It contains no unique firm-specific details, only standard boilerplate materiality language.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including its detection timing, affected IT systems, and initial containment and investigation response actions, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, containment and remediation response actions, and resolution of the threat actor's access, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes an actual cybersecurity incident, including the nature of unauthorized access and the scope of compromised user data, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No competing categories apply to this incident narrative.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the materiality and potential financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident itself, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph only includes a standalone materiality assessment of an incident without describing the incident's event details, which fits the Strategy Integration category per classification rules.


reasoning: This paragraph provides a substantive update on the actual, previously disclosed Change Healthcare cyberattack, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident with a specific detection date, details of unauthorized data exfiltration, and initial response actions, which fits the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details response actions taken to address a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including threat containment, enhanced monitoring, regulatory notifications, and engagement of external experts, which qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category. No firm-unique or verifiable specific facts are included, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph details the timeline, nature, and progression of a confirmed real cybersecurity incident affecting the company, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standard legal disclaimer regarding SEC filing status with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real cybersecurity incident and the subsidiary's in-progress response actions, which fits the Incident Disclosure category. No unique or verifiable firm-specific facts are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a materiality assessment of a past cyber incident with no narrative describing the incident itself, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category requirements for standalone materiality conclusions related to cybersecurity.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident and the company's immediate response actions to contain, investigate, and remediate the unauthorized activity, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No qualifying unique or verifiable specific facts are present to meet the threshold for higher specificity ratings.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the ongoing investigation into a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, including details of confirmed file exfiltration and evaluation of required regulatory notifications, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph details ongoing response actions for a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including containment and remediation efforts, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No unique or verifiable firm-specific facts are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph references a confirmed actual cybersecurity incident and details ongoing response and operational status related to that event, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph details post-incident remediation and system recovery actions taken in response to an actual cybersecurity incident, aligning with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph only evaluates the material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without including any narrative describing the incident's details, so it falls under the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed real-world cybersecurity incident, including its detection date, the nature of the unauthorized activity, and immediate response steps taken, which fits the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph’s core subject is the company’s board of directors, which is responsible for overseeing cybersecurity risks, fitting the Board Governance category as the board is the central thematic and grammatical subject.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal integration of cybersecurity risk management into its enterprise risk management programs, which falls under the Risk Management Process category. No unique firm-specific facts or named industry standards are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph only includes a forward-looking disclaimer and a cross-reference to the filing's Risk Factors section, with no substantive cybersecurity content, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses on a board committee receiving cybersecurity risk updates from management and reporting its related activities to the full board, making Board Governance the clear category for this board-level cyber oversight content.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal internal cybersecurity risk management and enterprise risk assessment processes, which qualifies it for the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity risk management process, which includes evaluating third-party vendors as a component of internal practices rather than focusing exclusively on vendor oversight, so it falls under Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal process for integrating cybersecurity risk management into its enterprise risk management framework, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category. It contains no firm-specific or named standard details, so it qualifies as Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only non-cybersecurity professional background information with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, qualifying it for the None/Other category.


reasoning: This paragraph's core grammatical subjects are the company's board of directors and its audit committee, whose primary role described is cybersecurity risk oversight, which aligns with the Board Governance content category. No unique firm-specific facts are included, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses the company's internal cybersecurity processes and controls designed to protect its systems and data, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category. No unique company-specific details or named standards are included, so the specificity is Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph details board-level oversight of data privacy and cybersecurity compliance, including annual review of the dedicated Cybersecurity Committee, so it falls under Board Governance.


reasoning: This paragraph describes Teradata's internal cybersecurity program, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category as it covers the company's core internal security practices. It contains no unique, specific details that would elevate its specificity rating beyond generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the scope of an actual realized cybersecurity incident, detailing what data was not compromised and the categories of affected data, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses solely on evaluating the material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident, with no detailed narrative of the incident's occurrence or scope, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. Its core content is a conclusion that the incident will not materially harm the company's overall financial condition.


reasoning: This paragraph is a generic introductory section opening with no substantive cybersecurity disclosure (no governance, processes, incidents, or other defined category content), so it qualifies as None/Other.


reasoning: The paragraph focuses entirely on the qualifications and tenure of the company's cybersecurity management role, which is the grammatical subject of the text, so it is classified as Management Role. This aligns with the category's requirements for content centered on a cybersecurity-focused management position.


reasoning: The paragraph's main grammatical subject is the Board of Directors, which receives cybersecurity-related briefings to perform its oversight duties, which aligns with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal incident response and recovery planning and regular testing, which constitutes its internal cybersecurity risk management processes, matching the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph focuses on the board of directors and its audit committee conducting cybersecurity oversight, which aligns with the Board Governance category, as board-related entities are the core grammatical subjects.


reasoning: The paragraph describes the qualifications of specific cybersecurity-focused management roles, which aligns with the Management Role content category. The core focus is on the credentials of internal management leaders responsible for the company's cybersecurity function.


reasoning: This paragraph addresses the company's internal practice of integrating cybersecurity risk into its enterprise risk management program, so it is categorized as Risk Management Process. No unique, firm-specific or verifiable quantitative facts are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph presents a standalone materiality conclusion regarding cybersecurity incidents with no underlying incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It contains only generic language that could be applied to any company, with no unique firm-specific details.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's internal cybersecurity processes, including a PII protection policy and mandatory employee training, which qualifies for the Risk Management Process category as it describes internal risk mitigation practices.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses the qualifications of the company's internal IT team, a management group supporting cybersecurity, which aligns with the Management Role category. It contains no unique firm-specific or verifiable facts, so it is rated Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses the company's internal physical and software IT safeguards and general cybersecurity vulnerabilities, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it covers the company's own internal security measures. No firm-specific or verifiable unique facts are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph is a non-substantive section opening with no material cybersecurity disclosures, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: The paragraph's grammatical subject is the company's board of directors, which is assigned oversight of risk monitoring, aligning with the Board Governance category. The text contains no unique or verifiable specific facts, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This incomplete paragraph fragment contains no substantive cybersecurity disclosure related to board oversight, management roles, internal risk processes, third-party oversight, or reported incidents, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: The paragraph's core subject is the internal cybersecurity coordinator, a management role, with its defined responsibilities and reporting line, so it is classified as Management Role.


specificity_confidence: medium

reasoning: The paragraph identifies a dedicated IT department leadership role and executive management as the parties responsible for the company's cybersecurity risk oversight, which aligns with the Management Role content category.


reasoning: The paragraph's grammatical subject is the Board, which receives updates on cybersecurity risks, testing, and remediation, so it fits the Board Governance category for board-level cyber risk oversight. No incident details, management roles, or third-party risk are the central focus here.


reasoning: This paragraph's entire central focus is oversight of third-party IT service providers' cybersecurity practices, which exclusively qualifies for the Third-Party Risk category. No other cybersecurity topic takes priority in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a generic internal cybersecurity response step with no reference to a specific real incident, so it is classified as Risk Management Process. No unique, verifiable firm-specific facts are included, leading to the Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the Board and standard Audit Committee receiving regular cybersecurity risk and incident updates, which constitutes board-level oversight of cyber risk, fitting the Board Governance category.


reasoning: The paragraph's core grammatical subjects are the CSO and CISO, senior cybersecurity management roles, and it describes their risk tracking activities and internal reporting lines, which directly fits the Management Role category for SEC cybersecurity disclosures.


reasoning: This paragraph details elements of the company's internal cybersecurity program activities, which qualifies for the Risk Management Process category. No unique firm-specific or verifiable facts are present, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on company management roles (CIO, VP of Information Security) as its grammatical subjects, which are tasked with leading the cybersecurity program, so it falls under the Management Role category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal practice of regularly reviewing and updating its incident response plan, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it covers internal cybersecurity process refinement.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks, reporting no material breaches or associated costs over the specified fiscal periods, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on identifying the company's cybersecurity management leadership, specifically naming its CFO as the acting CISO, which aligns with the Management Role category that covers CISO identification and role assignments.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standalone materiality assessment of past cybersecurity incident expenses with no incident narrative, which qualifies for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes internal employee security awareness and training practices that form part of the company's in-house cybersecurity risk management operations, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal processes for monitoring and mitigating cybersecurity risks, qualifying for the Risk Management Process category; third-party service providers are only a minor component of these internal processes, not the central focus.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity risk management practices, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it addresses core internal information security safeguards. No unique, verifiable facts are included, so the specificity rating is Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal strategies for assessing and managing cybersecurity risks, which falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph covers cyber insurance, a financial cybersecurity risk mitigation tool that aligns with the Strategy Integration category. It contains no unique company-specific facts or named standards, qualifying it as generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal processes for identifying, assessing, and managing cybersecurity risks to its systems and data, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category. Third-party hosted services are only a minor component of the internal risk framework, so Third-Party Risk does not apply.


reasoning: This paragraph describes internal company practices for cybersecurity training and policy communication, which are core internal cybersecurity risk management processes, so it is categorized as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: The paragraph describes the company's internal system for identifying, assessing, and mitigating cybersecurity risks, which qualifies as a Risk Management Process disclosure focused on the company's own internal risk workflows. No unique or named standards are referenced, so it is generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes internal cybersecurity staff performing core risk mitigation, monitoring, and incident response activities, which aligns with the company's internal risk management process disclosures.


reasoning: The paragraph’s grammatical subject is the Company’s Board of Directors, which provides oversight of the cybersecurity program, so it falls under the Board Governance category. No unique firm-specific details are included, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity incident response planning and annual testing protocols, which falls under the Risk Management Process category as it details the company's own internal processes for managing cyber incident risk.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity program and threat-tracking processes, which align with the Risk Management Process category, as it focuses on the company's own internal security operations.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity processes, including employee training and third-party monitoring embedded within its in-house risk management framework, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category. No unique firm-specific facts or named recognized standards are present, so it receives a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cybersecurity and IT programs and related control processes, which falls directly into the Risk Management Process category as it covers the firm's own internal security management practices.


reasoning: This paragraph contains no substantive cybersecurity disclosure, only a generic statement of overarching security goals, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: The paragraph outlines cybersecurity-related responsibilities held by the company's C-suite management positions, which are internal management roles, so Management Role is the correct category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality assessment stating no material cybersecurity incidents have impacted the company, which falls under the Strategy Integration category for materiality conclusions.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the internal IT management team responsible for day-to-day cybersecurity operations, which aligns with the Management Role category focused on internal leadership of cybersecurity functions.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the company's internal cross-departmental cybersecurity team, an internal process for managing cybersecurity awareness and information sharing, which falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standalone materiality assessment of a cybersecurity incident with no supporting incident narrative, so it falls under the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph contains only a standalone materiality assessment of a cybersecurity incident with no description of the incident itself, qualifying it for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses the potential material financial impact of an unspecified cybersecurity incident, with no detailed incident narrative, so it falls under Strategy Integration per the category rules.


reasoning: This paragraph only provides a standalone materiality conclusion about a referenced cybersecurity incident, with no description of the incident itself, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses cybersecurity insurance coverage for incident-related costs without describing any details of the underlying cyber incident, which falls under the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes ongoing investigative response actions for a disclosed cybersecurity incident, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph details ongoing response and remediation actions for a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including system restoration efforts and coordination with law enforcement and regulators, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph only provides a materiality conclusion about the potential financial and operational impact of a cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses the company's cybersecurity insurance policy, a financial risk mitigation tool that falls under the Strategy Integration category, which covers cyber insurance as a core topic. There are no references to incident narratives, board governance, management roles, or internal risk processes that would warrant a different category.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's planned internal process for identifying and managing cybersecurity risks as part of its broader enterprise risk management framework, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses potential business, financial, and insurance-related impacts of a past cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the material financial and operational impact of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph only delivers a standalone materiality conclusion about the referenced cybersecurity incident, assessing its potential to impact the company's operations and financial condition, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category definition.


reasoning: This paragraph only provides a materiality assessment for a cybersecurity incident with no description of the incident itself, qualifying for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph discusses non-cybersecurity contractual terms related to the company's Credit and Lease Agreements, with no substantive cybersecurity disclosures, so it is categorized as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses potential financial impacts and materiality considerations related to a cybersecurity incident, with no description of the incident itself, so it is properly categorized as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph contains a standalone materiality conclusion that no identified cybersecurity threats would materially impact the company's operations or finances, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category for standalone materiality assessments.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including the exfiltration of limited company data containing some personally identifiable information and ongoing regulatory and stakeholder notification response actions, which falls under Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique firm-specific or independently verifiable hard facts, so it is rated Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph details post-incident response actions for a real cybersecurity incident, qualifying it for the Incident Disclosure category. No unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts are included, so it is classified as Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph provides only a standalone materiality assessment of an incident without any narrative describing the incident event, qualifying it for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the material operational and financial impact of a referenced incident without describing the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph identifies which specific management roles oversee the company's cybersecurity processes, aligning with the Management Role category that covers assignment of cybersecurity responsibilities to organizational leadership.


reasoning: This paragraph describes response actions taken in relation to a disclosed cybersecurity incident, fitting the Incident Disclosure category. It contains only generic incident response language with no unique firm-specific or verifiable details.


reasoning: This paragraph solely discusses insurance reimbursement for costs related to a cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident itself, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes an active, real cybersecurity incident, including accessibility impacts to the company's networks and transactional services, qualifying it for the Incident Disclosure category. It provides a unique firm-specific URL for public updates on the disclosed incident.


reasoning: This paragraph solely discusses the materiality and potential operational, legal, and financial impacts of a cybersecurity incident without detailing the incident event, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a leadership change at the company's Korean subsidiary, which is unrelated to cybersecurity disclosures and does not fit any of the cybersecurity-focused content categories, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph describes response actions taken for a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including mitigating unauthorized access and planning customer notifications, which fits the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the potential material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident, with no narrative describing the incident's occurrence or scope, so it qualifies as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph provides updates on the ongoing investigation and planned response actions for a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. No unique, verifiable firm-specific details are present in the text.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the material operational and financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on cybersecurity-focused management roles, covering their professional qualifications and reporting structure, which aligns with the Management Role content category.


reasoning: This paragraph details response actions for a confirmed, real cybersecurity incident, including containment of the incident and restoration of core IT systems, which fits the Incident Disclosure category. The text contains no unique firm-specific details, making it generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes ongoing updates to a confirmed cybersecurity incident, including the undetermined scope of potentially affected data, which qualifies it for the Incident Disclosure category, as it focuses on core incident-related status updates rather than only strategic or financial claims.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident with explicit dates and details of exposed customer data, so it falls under the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses the materiality of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident event, so it is classified as Strategy Integration. It contains no unique firm-specific or verifiable facts, qualifying it as Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes ongoing investigative response actions for a confirmed cybersecurity incident, fitting the Incident Disclosure category. No unique or verifiable firm-specific facts are present, so it qualifies as generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses monitoring the materiality of an incident without describing the event itself, so it is categorized as Strategy Integration per the category rules.


reasoning: This paragraph details response actions for an actual disclosed cybersecurity incident, including containment of the incident and ongoing system restoration efforts, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a response action tied to a confirmed cybersecurity incident, which qualifies it for the Incident Disclosure category. The text contains no unique firm-specific or independently verifiable hard facts, so it is rated Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the potential material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident itself, qualifying for the Strategy Integration category. It contains no unique or verifiable firm-specific facts, resulting in a Generic Boilerplate specificity rating.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the operational impacts of a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including current disruptions to online ordering in parts of the US, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details the confirmed actions of a perpetrator during an active cybersecurity incident, including unauthorized system access, data exfiltration, and data encryption on company systems, so it qualifies as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the operational impact of a confirmed cybersecurity incident and ongoing system restoration activities, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph describes response actions taken for a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including an ongoing investigation and law enforcement notification, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category. The secondary materiality statement does not shift the primary focus of the paragraph.


reasoning: This paragraph describes the scope and planned response actions for an actual disclosed cybersecurity incident, meeting the criteria for Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique firm-specific or verifiable hard facts, so it is classified as Generic Boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph only addresses the costs and operational impacts of a previously disclosed cyber incident without including a narrative of the incident event, so it falls under Strategy Integration, which covers financial and material impacts of cybersecurity events.


reasoning: This paragraph describes post-incident response actions and investigation outcomes for a confirmed real cybersecurity incident, so it falls under Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique firm-specific details or named standards, qualifying it as generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph only assesses the material, operational, and financial impacts of a referenced incident without describing the incident's details, qualifying it for the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph only provides a standalone materiality conclusion regarding a prior cybersecurity incident, with no description of the incident's details, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a confirmed, actual cybersecurity incident with its timing and initial response actions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, confirmed cybersecurity incident, including its occurrence date, system outage impact, and initial response actions, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure.


reasoning: This paragraph details operational impacts and a response action for an active disclosed cybersecurity incident, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category requirements.


reasoning: This paragraph exclusively discusses the undetermined material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without describing the incident's details, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category requirements for standalone materiality assessments tied to an incident.


reasoning: This paragraph only discusses the material financial impact of a cybersecurity incident without including any incident narrative, so it is classified as Strategy Integration.


reasoning: This paragraph references a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized system access, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure. The category is unambiguous as it directly describes a confirmed event rather than generic governance or process language.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real cybersecurity incident, its root cause, and the Bank’s immediate response actions, so it is classified as Incident Disclosure. It does not center vendor oversight as its sole main topic, so it is not coded as Third-Party Risk.


reasoning: This paragraph describes response actions tied to a confirmed actual unauthorized access cybersecurity incident, meeting the criteria for Incident Disclosure. It contains no unique or verifiable firm-specific facts, so it is classified as generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph details a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident, including the date the company was notified of unauthorized system activity and initial response actions, which aligns with the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: The paragraph outlines the company's internal IT network monitoring and cybersecurity risk mitigation processes, which fits the Risk Management Process category. No unique firm-specific facts are present, so the disclosure is generic boilerplate.


reasoning: This paragraph describes response actions taken to maintain critical business operations while restoring systems following a cybersecurity incident, which falls under the Incident Disclosure category as it references real incident-related response measures.


reasoning: This paragraph describes a real, disclosed cybersecurity incident including its detection date and the nature of the fraudulent fund attempt, which meets all criteria for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph is solely a cross-reference to an attached press release, containing no substantive cybersecurity-related disclosure, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph details the systems scope and operational impact of a confirmed actual cybersecurity incident, which qualifies for the Incident Disclosure category.


reasoning: This paragraph’s core focus is on the Board of Directors and its Risk Committee’s cybersecurity oversight responsibilities, including their review of security program effectiveness and engagement cadence, which aligns with the Board Governance category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal multi-layered cybersecurity risk management processes, with third-party oversight as only one component of its internal risk systems, so it is classified as Risk Management Process. Third-party oversight is not the central topic, so it does not qualify as Third-Party Risk.


reasoning: This paragraph's primary focus is the composition, responsibilities, and reporting of the company's internal management Risk Management Team, which owns core cybersecurity risk management tasks, so it is classified as Management Role. Board oversight is a secondary, supporting detail rather than the central topic.


reasoning: This paragraph details S&T Bancorp's internal processes for assessing, escalating, and responding to cybersecurity incidents, including its formal incident response and business continuity programs, which fits the Risk Management Process category. Third-party vendors are only a minor component of continuity planning, not the central focus of the paragraph.


reasoning: This paragraph details GATX's full internal cybersecurity program, with third-party risk only included as a component of its broader internal risk management processes, so it falls under the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's CISO, a cybersecurity-specific management role, detailing their reporting structure, professional qualifications, and work history, which aligns with the Management Role category definition.


reasoning: This paragraph includes a standalone materiality assessment of cybersecurity risks for Oracle's fiscal 2024, plus discussion of potential future financial and reputational harm from cyber incidents, which aligns with the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's internal cybersecurity program, its policies, and internal processes for assessing and managing cyber risks, which aligns perfectly with the Risk Management Process category. The core focus is the organization's own internal workflows for cybersecurity governance and risk mitigation.


reasoning: This paragraph details Bel Fuse's internal cybersecurity risk management practices, including monitoring, penetration testing, team structure, and vendor risk oversight as a component of its broader internal programs, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on Wendy's internal, company-wide cybersecurity risk management strategy and its core components including framework adoption, risk assessments, infrastructure, dedicated personnel, and training, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph's central focus is the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, including framework adoption, internal monitoring, and security controls, with third-party due diligence only included as a supporting component of internal practices, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph only includes generic statements about the company's reliance on technology systems and potential cybersecurity threats, with no substantive disclosure of any of the defined specific content categories, so it is classified as None/Other.


reasoning: This paragraph details Black Stone Minerals' full suite of internal cybersecurity risk management processes, with third-party oversight only as a component of its broader internal program, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph only contains generic, non-substantive cybersecurity risk warnings with no disclosure of the company's actual cybersecurity practices, governance, or events, qualifying it for the None/Other category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, including incident escalation, technical safeguards, and third-party risk oversight as a component of broader internal processes, rather than having third-party risk as its central focus.


reasoning: This paragraph outlines the company's suite of internal cybersecurity processes, including threat mitigation, technical safeguards, incident response planning, and third-party oversight as a component of its overall internal risk management program, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on identifying the company's cybersecurity leadership roles, their professional qualifications, and their oversight by internal senior management, which aligns with the Management Role content category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity incident response, assessment, and protection processes, which centers on its own internal practices for managing cyber risk, qualifying it for the Risk Management Process category. No incident narrative, third-party vendor oversight as a central focus, or primary board/management role coverage is present.


reasoning: The paragraph centers on the company's internal cybersecurity risk management program, associated policies and practices to mitigate cyber threats, which aligns with the Risk Management Process category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal suite of cybersecurity risk management activities, with third-party supplier oversight only as one component of its broader internal program, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph includes a standalone materiality conclusion that past cybersecurity incidents have not had material operational impacts, plus discussion of potential future business and financial harms from potential breaches, which falls under the Strategy Integration category.


reasoning: This paragraph details the company's internal cybersecurity risk management processes, including enterprise-wide monitoring and incident response planning, with third-party services only included as a component of these internal processes, so it is classified as Risk Management Process.


reasoning: This paragraph centers on the company's Chief Information Officer, a senior management role, detailing their qualifications, cybersecurity program oversight, and reporting cadences to internal leadership and the board. The management role is the clear core focus of the text, with board oversight mentioned only as a secondary reporting recipient.