+Safeguarding Data Over Open Networks

Safeguarding Data Over Open Networks

Description

Cryptographic mechanisms exist to implement strong cryptography and security protocols to safeguard sensitive and/or regulated data during transmission over open, public networks.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Use HTTPS/TLS for all internet-facing communications

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

∙ TLS for all internet traffic
∙ No unencrypted protocols over public networks

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

∙ Encryption-in-transit standards
∙ TLS 1.2+ enforcement
∙ Certificate management

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

∙ Enterprise encryption-in-transit program
∙ TLS 1.3 enforcement
∙ Certificate lifecycle management

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

∙ Enterprise encryption governance program
∙ TLS 1.3+
∙ Certificate management platform (e.g., Venafi)
∙ Automated certificate monitoring

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

Network Security (NET) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with NET domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Network security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Network communications containing sensitive/regulated data are protected using a cryptographic mechanism to prevent unauthorized disclosure of information while in transit (e.g., SSH, TLS and VPN).
▪ Wireless access is protected via secure authentication and encryption.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Network Security (NET) 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 NET domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with NET 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 NET domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Network security-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Network security 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 personnel define secure networking practices to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the organization's TAASD.
▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies.
▪ Network communications containing sensitive/regulated data use a cryptographic mechanism to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information while in transit (e.g., SSH, TLS and VPN).

Level 3 Well Defined

Network Security (NET) 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 NET 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 NET domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A network security management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain NET domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of network security operations (e.g., network management solution and log aggregator).
▪ 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 NET 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).
▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies.
▪ An implemented and operational cryptographic capability exists to implement strong cryptography and security protocols to safeguard sensitive/regulated data during transmission over open, public networks.

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.

1. Přehled

1.1 Odkazy

1.2 Identifikované požadavky

1.3 Související regulace

2. Identifikované požadavky

Požadavky

3. Související regulace

Regulace
EULAW Článek 13 Řízení bezpečnosti sítí

Článek 13

Řízení bezpečnosti sítí

Finanční subjekty v rámci ochranných opatření zajišťujících bezpečnost sítí proti vniknutí a zneužití údajů vypracují, zdokumentují a zavedou politiky, postupy, protokoly a nástroje pro řízení bezpečnosti sítí, včetně všech následujících prvků:

a) 

oddělení a segmentace systémů a sítí IKT s ohledem na:

i) 

zásadnost nebo důležitost funkce, kterou tyto systémy a sítě IKT podporují;

ii) 

klasifikaci stanovenou v souladu s čl. 8 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554;

iii) 

celkový rizikový profil aktiv v oblasti IKT využívajících tyto systémy a sítě IKT;

b) 

dokumentace všech síťových připojení a datových toků finančního subjektu;

c) 

používání oddělené a vyhrazené sítě pro správu aktiv v oblasti IKT;

d) 

stanovení a provádění kontrol přístupu k síti, aby se zabránilo tomu, že se k síti finančního subjektu připojí jakékoli neschválené zařízení nebo systém nebo jakýkoli koncový bod, který nesplňuje bezpečnostní požadavky finančního subjektu;

e) 

šifrování síťových spojení procházejících podnikovými sítěmi, veřejnými sítěmi, domácími sítěmi, sítěmi třetích stran a bezdrátovými sítěmi pro používané komunikační protokoly s přihlédnutím k výsledkům schválené klasifikace dat, výsledkům posouzení rizik v oblasti IKT a šifrování síťových spojení podle čl. 6 odst. 2;

f) 

koncepce sítí v souladu s požadavky na bezpečnost IKT stanovenými finančním subjektem s přihlédnutím k osvědčeným postupům pro zajištění důvěrnosti, integrity a dostupnosti sítě;

g) 

zabezpečení síťového provozu mezi interními sítěmi a internetem a dalšími externími připojeními;

h) 

stanovení úloh a povinností a kroků pro specifikaci, provádění, schvalování, změnu a revizi pravidel brány firewall a filtrů připojení;

i) 

přezkumy architektury sítě a návrhu zabezpečení sítě prováděné jednou za rok a pravidelně u mikropodniků, aby se zjistily potenciální zranitelnosti;

j) 

opatření pro případnou dočasnou izolaci dílčích sítí a síťových komponent a zařízení;

k) 

zavedení základní úrovně bezpečné konfigurace všech síťových komponent a zabezpečení („hardening“) sítě a síťových zařízení v souladu s pokyny dodavatele, případně s normami definovanými v čl. 2 bodě 1 nařízení (EU) č. 1025/2012 a s osvědčenými postupy;

l) 

postupy pro omezení, uzamčení a ukončení systémových a vzdálených relací po určité době nečinnosti;

m) 

v případě smluv o síťových službách:

i) 

určení a specifikace opatření v oblasti bezpečnosti IKT a informací, úrovní služeb a požadavků na řízení všech síťových služeb;

ii) 

to, zda tyto služby poskytuje poskytovatel služeb IKT v rámci skupiny nebo poskytovatelé služeb IKT z řad třetích stran.

Pro účely písmene h) provádějí finanční subjekty pravidelný přezkum pravidel brány firewall a filtrů připojení v souladu s klasifikací stanovenou podle čl. 8 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554 a s celkovým rizikovým profilem příslušných systémů IKT. U systémů IKT, které podporují zásadní nebo důležité funkce, musí finanční subjekty ověřovat přiměřenost stávajících pravidel brány firewall a filtrů připojení nejméně jednou za šest měsíců.
EULAW Článek 14 Zabezpečení informací během přenosu
-

Propojené úkoly

Vazby
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 08
is related to Technology
is related to Protect
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 Unauthorized Access
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Intellectual Property / Trade Secret Loss
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Long-Term Confidentiality Loss from Cryptographic Obsolescence
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Authenticity / Provenance
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks Harvest Now / Decrypt Later (HNDL)
blocks Cryptographic Compromise / Cryptanalytic Capability Advancement
blocks CRY-01.01B
blocks COS-08.01B
blocks COS-08.02B
blocks SSO-07.01B
blocks SSO-07.01AS
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Intellectual Property / Trade Secret Loss
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Long-Term Confidentiality Loss from Cryptographic Obsolescence
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Authenticity / Provenance
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks Harvest Now / Decrypt Later (HNDL)
blocks Cryptographic Compromise / Cryptanalytic Capability Advancement
blocks CRY-01.01B
blocks COS-08.01B
blocks COS-08.02B
blocks SSO-07.01B
blocks SSO-07.01AS
is blocked by NET-37 Safeguarding Data Over Open Networks – Assessment Procedure
blocks AC-02 Account Management
blocks AC-03 Access Enforcement
blocks AC-05 Separation of Duties
blocks SI-03 Malicious Code Protection
blocks SI-04 System Monitoring
blocks SI-05 Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-07 Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
blocks SI-10 Information Input Validation
blocks AC-02 [L] Account Management
blocks AC-03 [L] Access Enforcement
blocks SI-03 [L] Malicious Code Protection
blocks SI-04 [L] System Monitoring
blocks SI-05 [L] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks AC-02 [M] Account Management
blocks AC-03 [M] Access Enforcement
blocks AC-05 [M] Separation of Duties
blocks SI-03 [M] Malicious Code Protection
blocks SI-04 [M] System Monitoring
blocks SI-05 [M] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-07 [M] Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
blocks SI-10 [M] Information Input Validation
blocks AC-02 [H] Account Management
blocks AC-03 [H] Access Enforcement
blocks AC-05 [H] Separation of Duties
blocks SI-03 [H] Malicious Code Protection
blocks SI-04 [H] System Monitoring
blocks SI-05 [H] Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks SI-07 [H] Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
blocks SI-10 [H] Information Input Validation