+Threat Intelligence Feeds

Threat Intelligence Feeds

Description

Mechanisms exist to maintain situational awareness of vulnerabilities and evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2

∙ US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
∙ Internal newsletters

Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4

∙ US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
∙ Internal newsletters

Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6

∙ US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
∙ Internal newsletters
∙ InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8

∙ US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
∙ Internal newsletters
∙ InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9

∙ US-CERT mailing lists & feeds
∙ Internal newsletters
∙ InfraGard (https://infragard.org)

SCR-CMM

Level 0 Not Performed

Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.

Level 1 Performed Informally

Threat Management (THR) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with THR domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Threat management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Threat Management (THR) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Policies and standards associated with THR domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with THR domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with THR domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Threat management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Threat management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel in supervisory positions subscribe to news feeds from groups and associations to facilitate ongoing education and training.

Level 3 Well Defined

Threat Management (THR) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Policies and standards associated with THR domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty solution).
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with THR domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to maintain situational awareness of vulnerabilities and evolving threats by leveraging the knowledge of attacker tactics, techniques and procedures to facilitate the implementation of preventative and compensating controls.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Threat Management (THR) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational.
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
▪ Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
▪ Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
▪ Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.

Level 5 Continuously Improving

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

1. Преглед

1.1 Препратки

1.2 Идентифицирани изисквания

1.3 Свързани регулации

2. Идентифицирани изисквания

Изисквания

3. Свързани регулации

Регулации
EULAW Член 10 Уязвими места и управление на коригирането
-
EULAW Член 23 Откриване на необичайни дейности и критерии за процесите за откриване на инциденти с ИКТ и за реакция
-
EULAW Член 34 Сигурност на основаните на ИКТ операции

Член 34

Сигурност на основаните на ИКТ операции

Финансовите субекти, посочени в член 16, параграф 1 от Регламент (ЕС) 2022/2554, като част от своите системи, протоколи и инструменти и във връзка с всички активи на ИКТ:

а) 

наблюдават и управляват жизнения цикъл на всички активи на ИКТ;

б) 

наблюдават дали активите на ИКТ са поддържани от трети страни доставчици на услуги в областта на ИКТ на финансови субекти, когато е приложимо;

в) 

идентифицират изискванията във връзка с капацитета на своите активи на ИКТ, както и мерки за поддържане и подобряване на наличността и ефикасността на системите на ИКТ, и предотвратяват недостига на капацитет, преди такъв да настъпи;

г) 

извършват автоматизирано сканиране за уязвими места, както и оценки на активите на ИКТ, съизмерими с тяхната класификация, посочена в член 30, параграф 1, и с цялостния рисков профил на активите на ИКТ, и внедряват корекции за отстраняване на установените уязвими места;

д) 

управляват рисковете, свързани с остарели, неподдържани или наследени активи на ИКТ;

е) 

регистрират събития, свързани с контрол на логическия и физическия достъп, основани на ИКТ операции, включително дейности по системен и мрежови пренос и управление на промените в областта на ИКТ;

ж) 

идентифицират и прилагат мерки за наблюдение и анализ на информация за необичайни дейности и поведение във връзка с критични или важни основани на ИКТ операции;

з) 

прилагат мерки за наблюдение на подходяща и актуална информация за киберзаплахи;

и) 

прилагат мерки за идентифициране на възможни изтичания на информация, злонамерен код и други заплахи за сигурността и публично известни уязвими места в софтуера и хардуера и проверяват за съответните нови актуализации във връзка със сигурността.

За целите на буква е) финансовите субекти привеждат в съответствие нивото на детайлност на регистрационните файлове с целта и употребата на своя актив на ИКТ, за който се създават тези регистрационни файлове.
EULAW Член 13 Обучение и развитие
-
EULAW Article 13 1

1.   Financial entities shall have in place capabilities and staff to gather information on vulnerabilities and cyber threats, ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, and analyse the impact they are likely to have on their digital operational resilience.

Свързани задачи

Връзки
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 08
is related to Process
is related to Identify
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Revenue Loss
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Loss of Competitive Advantage
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Internal Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of internal controls
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Harm from Illegal, Abusive or Unsafe Content / Conduct
blocks Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks Lack of a security-minded workforce
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Third-Party Physical Security Disruption / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Harm from Unauthorized / Unintended Product or Service Use
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
blocks Exploitation for Privilege Escalation
blocks Exploitation of Remote Services
blocks Exploitation for Stealth
blocks Exploitation for Credential Access
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Drought & Water Shortage
blocks Earthquakes
blocks Fire & Wildfires
blocks Floods
blocks Hurricanes & Tropical Storms
blocks Landslides & Debris Flow
blocks Pandemic (Disease) Outbreaks
blocks Severe Weather
blocks Space Weather
blocks Thunderstorms & Lightning
blocks Tornadoes
blocks Tsunamis
blocks Volcanoes
blocks Winter Storms & Extreme Cold
blocks Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Utility Service Disruption
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention
blocks Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
blocks OIS-05.01B
blocks IAM-03.03B
blocks PSS-02.02B
blocks PSS-03.05B
is blocked by THR-04 Threat Intelligence Feeds – Assessment Procedure
blocks PM-16(01) Automated Means for Sharing Threat Intelligence
blocks SI-05 Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-05(01) Automated Alerts and Advisories
blocks SI-05 [L] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-05 [M] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-05 [H] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-05(01) [H] Automated Alerts and Advisories
blocks 03.02.01 Literacy Training and Awareness
blocks 03.11.02 Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning
blocks 03.14.03 Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks ID.RA-02 Cyber threat intelligence is received from information sharing forums and sources
blocks ID.RA-03 Internal and external threats to the organization are identified and recorded
blocks ID.RA-08 Processes for receiving, analyzing, and responding to vulnerability disclosures are established
blocks DE DETECT
blocks DE.AE-07 Cyber threat intelligence and other contextual information are integrated into the analysis
  • Secure Controls Framework -

    The Secure Controls Framework® (SCF)

    "The SCF is the Common Controls Framework™ (CCF), the world's most comprehensive cybersecurity and data privacy metaframework - it is also free to use. The entire concept is building secure, compliant and resilient capabilities in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible.

    The SCF is more than just a unified control catalog, since its included content creates a playbook for Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) capabilities. Used globally by organizations of every size, the SCF is a robust and scalable solution for security, compliance and resilience controls. As a comprehensive security framework, the SCF maps 1,400+ controls across 200+ laws, regulations, and industry frameworks so you can implement once and comply everywhere.

    Like it or not, cybersecurity is a protracted war on an asymmetric battlefield, where the threats are everywhere and as defenders we have to make the effort to work together to help improve cybersecurity and data privacy practices, since we all suffer when massive data breaches occur or when cyber attacks have physical impacts. Hackers share information on attack methods with other hackers, so why shouldn’t the good guys share information on how to best protect an organization? We decided to take action and make a difference, since we feel it is too important to wait for someone else to fix the problems that exist.

    The SCF is made up of volunteers, mainly specialists within the cybersecurity profession, who focus on GRC and the cybersecurity side of data privacy. These are auditors, engineers, architects, incident responders, consultants and other specialists who live and breathe these topics on a daily basis. The end product is "expert-derived content" that makes up the SCF." https://securecontrolsframework.com/ 

    Terms & Conditions

    The SCF End User License Agreement (EULA) governs the use of the Secure Controls Framework® (SCF) under the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License.