+Článek 98 Regulační technické normy týkající se ověřování a komunikace
---+Článek 98 1.
---+Článek 98 2.
---+Článek 98 3.
---+Článek 98 4.
---+Článek 98 5.

Článek 98 Regulační technické normy týkající se ověřování a komunikace

-

1. Přehled

,
Článek 98 1.

V souladu s článkem 10 nařízení (EU) č. 1093/2010 vypracuje EBA v úzké spolupráci s ECB a po konzultaci se všemi zúčastněnými stranami, a to i na trhu platebních služeb a s přihlédnutím ke všem relevantním zájmům, návrhy regulačních technických norem pro poskytovatele platebních služeb uvedené v čl. 1 odst. 1 této směrnice, které stanoví:

a) 

požadavky na silné ověření klienta podle čl. 97 odst. 1 a 2;

b) 

výjimky z uplatňování čl. 97 odst. 1, 2 a 3 na základě kritérií stanovených v odstavci 3 tohoto článku;

c) 

požadavky, které musejí v souladu s čl. 97 odst. 3 splňovat bezpečnostní opatření za účelem ochrany důvěrnosti a integrity osobních bezpečnostních údajů uživatelů platebních služeb, a

d) 

požadavky na společné a bezpečné otevřené standardy komunikace pro účely identifikace, ověřování, oznamování a poskytování informací, jakož i provádění bezpečnostních opatření mezi poskytovateli platebních služeb, kteří vedou účet, poskytovateli služeb iniciování platby, poskytovateli služeb informování o účtu, plátci, příjemci a dalšími poskytovateli platebních služeb.
Článek 98 2.

Návrhy regulačních technických norem uvedené v odstavci 1 vypracuje EBA v souladu s těmito cíli:

a) 

zajistit přijetím účinných požadavků založených na posuzování rizik vhodnou úroveň bezpečnosti pro uživatele platebních služeb a poskytovatele platebních služeb;

b) 

zajistit bezpečnost peněžních prostředků a osobních údajů uživatelů platebních služeb;

c) 

zabezpečit a udržet spravedlivou hospodářskou soutěž všech poskytovatelů platebních služeb;

d) 

zajistit neutralitu obchodních modelů a technologií;

e) 

umožnit rozvoj uživatelsky přívětivých, dostupných a inovativních způsobů platby.
Článek 98 3.

Výjimky uvedené v odst. 1 písm. b) jsou založeny na těchto kritériích:

a) 

míra rizika spojeného s poskytovanou službou;

b) 

částka nebo opakování transakce;

c) 

způsob platby použitý k provedení transakce.
Článek 98 4.
Návrhy regulačních technických norem uvedené v odstavci 1 předloží EBA Komisi do 13. ledna 2017.

Komisi je svěřena pravomoc přijímat tyto regulační technické normy postupem podle článků 10 až 14 nařízení (EU) č. 1093/2010.
Článek 98 5.
EBA v souladu s článkem 10 nařízení (EU) č. 1093/2010 regulační technické normy pravidelně přezkoumává a v případě potřeby je aktualizuje s ohledem mimo jiné na inovace a technologický rozvoj a na ustanovení kapitoly II nařízení (EU) 2022/2554.

1.1 Odkazy

1.2 Identifikované požadavky

1.3 Související standardy

2. Identifikované požadavky

Požadavky

3. Související standardy

Standardy
SCF Secure Practices Alignment Justification

Description

Mechanisms exist to align the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) with one or more industry-recognized frameworks that:
(1) Support external scrutiny; and
(2) Provide defensible justification for secure practices.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Informal alignment with NIST CSF 2.0, SCF CORE Fundamentals, CIS Controls or another framework that meets the organization's needs.

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

∙ Formal alignment with NIST CSF 2.0, SCF CORE Fundamentals, CIS Controls or another framework that meets the organization's needs.
∙ Gap analysis documentation
∙ Written justification for framework choices.

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

∙ Formal alignment to a framework or metaframework capable of addressing security, compliance and resilience needs.
∙ Documented gap analysis and justification
∙ GRC platform alignment reports (e.g., SCFConnect)

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

∙ Formal alignment to a framework or metaframework capable of addressing security, compliance and resilience needs.
∙ Regulatory mapping evidence packages
∙ GRC platform with framework comparison reporting

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

∙ Formal alignment to a framework or metaframework capable of addressing security, compliance and resilience needs.
∙ External auditor validation
∙ Board-level reporting on framework compliance
∙ GRC platform with automated framework mapping

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

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with GOV domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Governance-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Cybersecurity and data protection governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented.
▪ No formal cybersecurity and/or data protection principles are identified for the organization.
▪ Informal recommendations are leveraged to update existing policies and standards.
▪ The responsibility for developing and operating cybersecurity and data privacy procedures are up to the business process owner(s) to determine, including the definition and enforcement of roles and responsibilities.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Governance-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel ensure cybersecurity policies and standards are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework).

Level 3 Well Defined

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain GOV 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).
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to align the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) with one or more industry-recognized frameworks that:
(1) Support external scrutiny; and
(2) Provide defensible justification for secure practices.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

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.
  • Builddate: 17.01.2025 00:00:00 -Doknr: CELEX:32015L2366
  • EULAW -

    EN: Legal acts of the European Union from EUR-Lex, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/. © European Union. Re-use is authorised by Decision 2011/833/EU, provided the source is acknowledged; the consolidated texts are licensed under CC BY 4.0 (EUR-Lex legal notice). Divided into sections and converted into the GRCA format, the wording unchanged. Only the legislation published in the Official Journal of the European Union is deemed authentic.

    DE: Rechtsakte der Europäischen Union aus EUR-Lex, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/. © Europäische Union. Weiterverwendung nach Beschluss 2011/833/EU mit Quellenangabe gestattet; die konsolidierten Fassungen stehen unter CC BY 4.0 (Rechtlicher Hinweis von EUR-Lex). In Abschnitte aufgeteilt und in das GRCA-Format umgewandelt, der Wortlaut unverändert. Verbindlich sind allein die im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union veröffentlichten Rechtsakte.