# Kevin Martin

Kevin Martin is a cybersecurity professional associated with Living Security who advocates using broader human-risk signals to identify and reduce security risks before incidents occur.

- Profile: https://b2binfluencer.marketing/creators/kevin-martin/
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/136kmartin
- LinkedIn followers: 2,540
- Topics: leadership
- Based on 11 dated posts, latest 2026-07-20

## Summary

Useful for arguing that awareness training scores miss real risk and for explaining broader human-risk signals.

- Best for: A security vendor campaign targeting CISOs and awareness leads on human risk management.
- Not for: A phishing simulation vendor seeking high-volume paid reach and benchmark click-rate ROI claims.
- Check first: Confirm audience matches target and ask for incident reduction evidence.

### Takeaways

- Click rates fell 14% while four credential compromises occurred in a month.
- Martin proposes aggregating identity, credential-exposure, endpoint, training-behaviour, and real-threat-response signals into ranked risk profiles.
- A three-step playbook: analyze incidents, use broader threat and identity data, intervene proactively.

## Main ideas

- **Simulation scores and completion rates measure test performance, not risk**: Martin argues that standard awareness-programme metrics answer the wrong question. A phishing platform can report who clicked a fake email, but it cannot say who is likely to enter real credentials because it does not pull in identity, credential-exposure, endpoint-behaviour or real-threat-response data. On that reasoning, a falling click rate and a high completion rate are not evidence that risk has fallen. The CISO and security awareness lead in the post are unnamed roles in a scenario Martin constructs, not quoted individuals.
- **Build ranked risk profiles by aggregating signals across systems**: The alternative Martin proposes is a data problem before it is a training problem. Combining identity, endpoint-behaviour, credential-exposure, training-behaviour and real-threat-response signals produces a ranked picture of who is most likely to cause harm—one security teams can act on before an incident. In a threat-intelligence post, they make a parallel argument for security operations, describing human-risk insight as something to integrate with technical threat data so teams can act on behavioural signals alongside threat data rather than treating them as separate streams. That post also names Living Security's Unify platform as the vehicle, putting the argument and a product claim together.
- **Intervene before the breach, not after the click**: Martin argues that post-click training arrives after the loss: the credential has already been entered and the link opened, making a nudge reactive and negative by design. They argue that nudges should come earlier and foster a positive security culture rather than correct behaviour after the fact. The case rests on predictability: if the person behind tomorrow's incident is making predictable decisions today, pre-incident intervention is possible and post-incident training avoidable.
- **A three-step incident-first playbook**: Martin distils the argument into an ordered sequence for teams already running a mature programme: start with incidents and analyse what happened and why; identify who is most susceptible using holistic data, including threat and identity data rather than behavioural data alone; then intervene proactively so the incident does not recur. The framing is a choice between playing to win and merely complying. The sequence is a decision order, not a technology description, making it their most portable argument.
- **The category argument has been won, and Martin claims a hand in winning it**: Martin treats incumbent vendors adopting the language of human risk management as proof the argument has moved from contested to settled: "When incumbents scramble to adopt your language, your framework, your category? You haven't lost the argument. You've won it." Alongside that sits a claim of authorship—Living Security "didn't disrupt #HumanRiskManagement, we built it"—backed by a third-party Top 25 cybersecurity companies placement alongside larger vendors. The conference post says incumbent adoption "is not a criticism" and reads as generous, while the recognition post stakes an origin claim over the same shift.

## Work to read

- [When phishing-test scores miss real incidents](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-7477380214134611968-so7V)
- [From participation metrics to incident prevention](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-7444435654089822209-7gqe)
- [How Martin describes a shift in human security](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-7434971097525022720-ujYU)
- [Connecting threat intelligence with human risk](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-7259649172448985090-gXv5)

## Brand relationships

- **Living Security** (disclosed_partnership)
- **Recorded Future** (mention)
- **National Cybersecurity Alliance** (mention)

## Partnerships

The posts show no sponsorship, advertising, or partnership offer from Kevin Martin. Written in an in-house voice on behalf of Living Security, they cover human risk management, phishing simulation limits, and incident-driven security metrics; promote Living Security's Unify platform and link to a vendor report; and celebrate a third-party industry award for the company. This is company marketing and earned recognition, not a disclosed creator partnership program. The posts and linked LinkedIn profile include no media kit, sponsored-format list, rate card, audience specification, or partnership inquiry route. Buyers considering a paid collaboration should ask directly about terms.

## Alternatives

- Scott Wright: Choose Wright when the campaign needs a live practitioner venue rather than an individual author. His posts show him convening CSAF (Cyber Security Awareness Forum) panel sessions for security awareness managers, CISOs and human risk practitioners, and arguing that professional relationships—not contact counts—do the work. For a vendor whose mid-funnel asset should be a webinar, roundtable or community session with named participants, this is a more direct route than a written piece. A second post, honouring a networking mentor, shows a personal register that could suit a human-risk campaign.
- Salman Hussain: Choose Hussain when the campaign targets the Gulf or shifts from training metrics to executive fraud and AI governance. One post tracks rising executive impersonation and CEO fraud across the Gulf using AI voice and video, social engineering and publicly available company information, then lists five countermeasures: verifying payment and sensitive requests through an independent channel, dual approvals and separation of duties, impersonation training, assessing executives’ public digital exposure, and BEC simulations. The other covers browser AI models installed without clear consent and frames the issue as one of consent, privacy, supply chain and AI governance. Both are short alerts with actions readers can take, suiting a checklist-style mid-funnel asset.
- Andy Elizaire: Choose Elizaire when the campaign focuses on AI in security operations rather than human risk training. The posts argue that AI changes every job rather than removing them, works as a force multiplier while business context and risk tolerance remain human decisions, and that AI-enabled ransomware compresses defenders’ time to detect and respond across identity, endpoint, network, cloud and email. Both name Sophos, including its Fusion and MDR offerings, as the direction of travel, giving a vendor a ready technical narrative and a speaker accustomed to presenting platforms to security leadership.

---
AI-assisted summary of public posts. Audience demographics are not available. Engagement appears only where we checked recent posts. Method: https://b2binfluencer.marketing/methodology/