+Identification & Authentication for Organizational Users
---+Out-of-Band Authentication (OOBA)
---+Acceptance of PIV Credentials
|
Identification & Authentication for Organizational Users
Description
Mechanisms exist to uniquely identify and centrally Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) organizational users and processes acting on behalf of organizational users.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Microsoft Active Directory (https://microsoft.com)
∙ Microsoft Entra (https://microsoft.com)
∙ AWS IAM (https://aws.amazon.com)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Microsoft Active Directory (https://microsoft.com)
∙ Microsoft Entra (https://microsoft.com)
∙ AWS IAM (https://aws.amazon.com)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Microsoft Active Directory (https://microsoft.com)
∙ Microsoft Entra (https://microsoft.com)
∙ AWS IAM (https://aws.amazon.com)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Microsoft Active Directory (https://microsoft.com)
∙ Microsoft Entra (https://microsoft.com)
∙ AWS IAM (https://aws.amazon.com)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Microsoft Active Directory (https://microsoft.com)
∙ Microsoft Entra (https://microsoft.com)
∙ AWS IAM (https://aws.amazon.com)
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
Identification & Authentication (IAC) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IAC domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IAM controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage accounts and permissions.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel identify and implement IAM cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements.
▪ Active Directory (AD), or a similar technologies, are used to centrally manage identities and permissions, but asset/process owners are authorized to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC).
▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services.
▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.
Level 3 Well Defined
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 uniquely identify and centrally Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) organizational users and processes acting on behalf of organizational users.
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
| Název |
Standard |
|
Out-of-Band Authentication (OOBA)
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement Out-of-Band Authentication (OOBA) under specific conditions.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
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
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process.
▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required.
▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization.
▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 Well Defined
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 implement Out-of-Band Authentication (OOBA) under specific conditions.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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.
|
|
Acceptance of PIV Credentials
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to accept and electronically verify organizational Personal Identity Verification (PIV) credentials.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)
∙ Identity & Access Management (IAM) program
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
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process.
▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC).
▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services.
▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.
Level 3 Well Defined
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 accept and electronically verify organizational Personal Identity Verification (PIV) credentials.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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.
|
1.1 Odkazy
1.2 Identifikované požadavky
1.3 Související regulace
2. Identifikované požadavky
Požadavky
| Zdroj |
Požadavek |
3. Související regulace
Regulace
| Zdroj |
Regulace |
|
EULAW
|
Článek 20 Správa identit
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Článek 20 Správa identit
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Článek 21 Řízení přístupu
Článek 21
V rámci kontroly správy přístupových práv finanční subjekty vypracují, zdokumentují a zavedou politiku, která zahrnuje všechny následující prvky:
a)
přidělování přístupových práv k aktivům v oblasti IKT na základě zásad „potřeba znát“ a „potřeba používat“ a zásady minimálních práv, a to i u vzdáleného a nouzového přístupu;
b)
oddělení úkolů s cílem zabránit neoprávněnému přístupu ke kritickým údajům nebo zabránit přidělování kombinací přístupových práv, které lze využít k obcházení kontrol;
c)
ustanovení o odpovědnosti uživatelů v tom smyslu, že se co nejvíce omezí používání obecných a sdílených uživatelských účtů a zajistí se, aby uživatelé byli vždy při provádění činností v systémech IKT identifikovatelní;
d)
ustanovení o omezení přístupu k aktivům v oblasti IKT, které stanoví kontrolní mechanismy a nástroje k zabránění neoprávněnému přístupu;
e)
postupy v oblasti správy účtů pro udělování, změnu nebo odebírání přístupových práv k uživatelským a obecným účtům, včetně obecných účtů správců, zahrnující všechny následující prvky:
i)
přidělení úloh a povinností týkajících se udělování, přezkumu a odebírání přístupových práv;
ii)
přidělování privilegovaného, nouzového a administrátorského přístupu podle potřeby nebo v režimu ad hoc u všech systémů IKT;
iii)
odebrání přístupových práv bez zbytečného odkladu po ukončení pracovního poměru nebo v případě, že přístup již není nutný;
iv)
aktualizace přístupových práv, pokud je nezbytné provést změny a jinak nejméně jednou ročně u všech systémů IKT, které nepodporují zásadní nebo důležité funkce, a nejméně jednou za šest měsíců u systémů IKT, které podporují zásadní nebo důležité funkce;
f)
metody ověřování zahrnující všechny tyto prvky:
i)
používání metod ověřování, které jsou úměrné klasifikaci stanovené v souladu s čl. 8 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554 a celkovému rizikovému profilu aktiv v oblasti IKT a zohledňují osvědčené postupy;
ii)
používání metod silného ověření v souladu s osvědčenými postupy a technikami pro vzdálený přístup do sítě finančního subjektu, pro privilegovaný přístup, pro přístup k aktivům v oblasti IKT podporujícím zásadní nebo důležité funkce nebo k veřejně přístupným aktivům v oblasti IKT;
g)
opatření pro řízení fyzického přístupu zahrnující:
i)
identifikaci a protokolování fyzických osob, které jsou oprávněny k přístupu do prostor, datových center a určených citlivých oblastí vymezených finančním subjektem, kde se nacházejí aktiva v oblasti IKT a informační aktiva;
ii)
udělování fyzických přístupových práv ke kritickým aktivům v oblasti IKT pouze oprávněným osobám v souladu se zásadou „potřeba znát“ a zásadou minimálních práv a v režimu ad hoc;
iii)
monitorování fyzického přístupu do prostor, datových center a určených citlivých oblastí vymezených finančním subjektem, kde se nacházejí aktiva v oblasti IKT nebo informační aktiva nebo obojí;
iv)
přezkum fyzických přístupových práv s cílem zajistit, aby byla nepotřebná přístupová práva neprodleně odebrána.
Pro účely písm. e) bodu i) stanoví finanční subjekty dobu uchovávání s přihlédnutím k obchodním cílům a cílům v oblasti bezpečnosti informací, důvodům pro zaznamenání události do protokolů a výsledkům posouzení rizik v oblasti IKT.
Pro účely písm. e) bodu ii) používají finanční subjekty pro provádění administrativních úkolů v systémech IKT pokud možno vyhrazené účty. Je-li to proveditelné a vhodné, zavedou finanční subjekty pro řízení privilegovaného přístupu automatizovaná řešení.
Pro účely písm. g) bodu i) musí být identifikace a protokolování úměrné významu prostor, datových center, určených citlivých oblastí a významu operací nebo systémů IKT, které se v nich nacházejí.
Pro účely písm. g) bodu iii) musí být monitorování úměrné klasifikaci stanovené v souladu s čl. 8 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554 a významu oblasti, do níž je poskytnut přístup.
|
|
EULAW
|
Článek 33 Řízení přístupu
Článek 33
Finanční subjekty uvedené v čl. 16 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554 vypracují, zdokumentují a zavedou postupy pro řízení logického a fyzického přístupu a tyto postupy prosazují, sledují a pravidelně přezkoumávají. Tyto postupy zahrnují následující prvky řízení logického a fyzického přístupu:
a)
přístupová práva k informačním aktivům, aktivům v oblasti IKT a jejich podporovaným funkcím a ke kritickým místům operací finančního subjektu jsou řízena na základě zásad „potřeba znát“ a „potřeba používat“ a zásady minimálních práv, a to i u vzdáleného a nouzového přístupu;
b)
odpovědnost uživatelů, která zajišťuje, že uživatelé mohou být v souvislosti s činnostmi prováděnými v systémech IKT identifikováni;
c)
postupy v oblasti správy účtů pro udělování, změnu nebo odebírání přístupových práv k uživatelským a obecným účtům, včetně obecných účtů správců:
d)
metody ověřování, které jsou úměrné klasifikaci uvedené v čl. 30 odst. 1 a celkovému rizikovému profilu aktiv v oblasti IKT a které jsou založeny na osvědčených postupech;
e)
přístupová práva jsou pravidelně přezkoumávána, a pokud již nejsou potřebná, jsou odebrána.
Pro účely písmene c) přiděluje finanční subjekt pro všechny systémy IKT privilegovaný, nouzový a administrátorský přístup podle potřeby nebo v režimu ad hoc a zaznamenává je v souladu s čl. 34 odst. 1 písm. f).
Pro účely písmene d) používají finanční subjekty metody silného ověření, které vycházejí z osvědčených postupů pro vzdálený přístup do sítě finančních subjektů, pro privilegovaný přístup a pro přístup k aktivům v oblasti IKT podporujícím zásadní nebo důležité funkce, které jsou veřejně přístupné.
|
|
EULAW
|
Článek 33 Řízení přístupu
Článek 33
Finanční subjekty uvedené v čl. 16 odst. 1 nařízení (EU) 2022/2554 vypracují, zdokumentují a zavedou postupy pro řízení logického a fyzického přístupu a tyto postupy prosazují, sledují a pravidelně přezkoumávají. Tyto postupy zahrnují následující prvky řízení logického a fyzického přístupu:
a)
přístupová práva k informačním aktivům, aktivům v oblasti IKT a jejich podporovaným funkcím a ke kritickým místům operací finančního subjektu jsou řízena na základě zásad „potřeba znát“ a „potřeba používat“ a zásady minimálních práv, a to i u vzdáleného a nouzového přístupu;
b)
odpovědnost uživatelů, která zajišťuje, že uživatelé mohou být v souvislosti s činnostmi prováděnými v systémech IKT identifikováni;
c)
postupy v oblasti správy účtů pro udělování, změnu nebo odebírání přístupových práv k uživatelským a obecným účtům, včetně obecných účtů správců:
d)
metody ověřování, které jsou úměrné klasifikaci uvedené v čl. 30 odst. 1 a celkovému rizikovému profilu aktiv v oblasti IKT a které jsou založeny na osvědčených postupech;
e)
přístupová práva jsou pravidelně přezkoumávána, a pokud již nejsou potřebná, jsou odebrána.
Pro účely písmene c) přiděluje finanční subjekt pro všechny systémy IKT privilegovaný, nouzový a administrátorský přístup podle potřeby nebo v režimu ad hoc a zaznamenává je v souladu s čl. 34 odst. 1 písm. f).
Pro účely písmene d) používají finanční subjekty metody silného ověření, které vycházejí z osvědčených postupů pro vzdálený přístup do sítě finančních subjektů, pro privilegovaný přístup a pro přístup k aktivům v oblasti IKT podporujícím zásadní nebo důležité funkce, které jsou veřejně přístupné.
|
Propojené úkoly
Vazby
| Typ vazby |
Úkol |
|
is related to
|
Annual |
|
is related to
|
relative Control Weighting = 09 |
|
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
|
OS Credential Dumping |
|
blocks
|
LSASS Memory |
|
blocks
|
Security Account Manager |
|
blocks
|
NTDS |
|
blocks
|
LSA Secrets |
|
blocks
|
Cached Domain Credentials |
|
blocks
|
DCSync |
|
blocks
|
Proc Filesystem |
|
blocks
|
/etc/passwd and /etc/shadow |
|
blocks
|
Remote Services |
|
blocks
|
Remote Desktop Protocol |
|
blocks
|
SMB/Windows Admin Shares |
|
blocks
|
Distributed Component Object Model |
|
blocks
|
SSH |
|
blocks
|
VNC |
|
blocks
|
Windows Remote Management |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Services |
|
blocks
|
Direct Cloud VM Connections |
|
blocks
|
Double File Extension |
|
blocks
|
Masquerade Account Name |
|
blocks
|
Network Sniffing |
|
blocks
|
Windows Management Instrumentation |
|
blocks
|
Scheduled Task/Job |
|
blocks
|
At |
|
blocks
|
Cron |
|
blocks
|
Scheduled Task |
|
blocks
|
Systemd Timers |
|
blocks
|
Container Orchestration Job |
|
blocks
|
Process Injection |
|
blocks
|
Ptrace System Calls |
|
blocks
|
Web Portal Capture |
|
blocks
|
Command and Scripting Interpreter |
|
blocks
|
PowerShell |
|
blocks
|
Network Device CLI |
|
blocks
|
Cloud API |
|
blocks
|
Software Deployment Tools |
|
blocks
|
Valid Accounts |
|
blocks
|
Domain Accounts |
|
blocks
|
Local Accounts |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Accounts |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Account |
|
blocks
|
Account Manipulation |
|
blocks
|
Additional Cloud Credentials |
|
blocks
|
Additional Email Delegate Permissions |
|
blocks
|
Additional Cloud Roles |
|
blocks
|
SSH Authorized Keys |
|
blocks
|
Additional Local or Domain Groups |
|
blocks
|
Brute Force |
|
blocks
|
Password Guessing |
|
blocks
|
Password Cracking |
|
blocks
|
Password Spraying |
|
blocks
|
Credential Stuffing |
|
blocks
|
Multi-Factor Authentication Interception |
|
blocks
|
Email Collection |
|
blocks
|
Remote Email Collection |
|
blocks
|
External Remote Services |
|
blocks
|
Access Token Manipulation |
|
blocks
|
Token Impersonation/Theft |
|
blocks
|
Create Process with Token |
|
blocks
|
Make and Impersonate Token |
|
blocks
|
Create Account |
|
blocks
|
Local Account |
|
blocks
|
Domain Account |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Account |
|
blocks
|
Browser Session Hijacking |
|
blocks
|
Exploit Public-Facing Application |
|
blocks
|
BITS Jobs |
|
blocks
|
Exploitation of Remote Services |
|
blocks
|
Exploitation for Credential Access |
|
blocks
|
Data from Information Repositories |
|
blocks
|
Confluence |
|
blocks
|
Sharepoint |
|
blocks
|
Code Repositories |
|
blocks
|
Customer Relationship Management Software |
|
blocks
|
Messaging Applications |
|
blocks
|
System Binary Proxy Execution |
|
blocks
|
Msiexec |
|
blocks
|
File and Directory Permissions Modification |
|
blocks
|
Windows Permissions |
|
blocks
|
Linux and Mac Permissions |
|
blocks
|
Domain or Tenant Policy Modification |
|
blocks
|
Service Stop |
|
blocks
|
Firmware Corruption |
|
blocks
|
Server Software Component |
|
blocks
|
Transport Agent |
|
blocks
|
IIS Components |
|
blocks
|
Implant Internal Image |
|
blocks
|
Steal Application Access Token |
|
blocks
|
Data from Cloud Storage |
|
blocks
|
Transfer Data to Cloud Account |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Service Dashboard |
|
blocks
|
Steal Web Session Cookie |
|
blocks
|
Pre-OS Boot |
|
blocks
|
System Firmware |
|
blocks
|
Bootkit |
|
blocks
|
TFTP Boot |
|
blocks
|
Create or Modify System Process |
|
blocks
|
Launch Agent |
|
blocks
|
Systemd Service |
|
blocks
|
Windows Service |
|
blocks
|
Launch Daemon |
|
blocks
|
Container Service |
|
blocks
|
Windows Management Instrumentation Event Subscription |
|
blocks
|
Winlogon Helper DLL |
|
blocks
|
Kernel Modules and Extensions |
|
blocks
|
Shortcut Modification |
|
blocks
|
Print Processors |
|
blocks
|
XDG Autostart Entries |
|
blocks
|
Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism |
|
blocks
|
Bypass User Account Control |
|
blocks
|
Sudo and Sudo Caching |
|
blocks
|
Use Alternate Authentication Material |
|
blocks
|
Application Access Token |
|
blocks
|
Pass the Hash |
|
blocks
|
Pass the Ticket |
|
blocks
|
Unsecured Credentials |
|
blocks
|
Credentials In Files |
|
blocks
|
Credentials in Registry |
|
blocks
|
Private Keys |
|
blocks
|
Group Policy Preferences |
|
blocks
|
Container API |
|
blocks
|
Password Managers |
|
blocks
|
Modify Authentication Process |
|
blocks
|
Domain Controller Authentication |
|
blocks
|
Pluggable Authentication Modules |
|
blocks
|
Network Device Authentication |
|
blocks
|
Multi-Factor Authentication |
|
blocks
|
Hybrid Identity |
|
blocks
|
Conditional Access Policies |
|
blocks
|
Steal or Forge Kerberos Tickets |
|
blocks
|
Golden Ticket |
|
blocks
|
Silver Ticket |
|
blocks
|
Kerberoasting |
|
blocks
|
AS-REP Roasting |
|
blocks
|
Ccache Files |
|
blocks
|
Inter-Process Communication |
|
blocks
|
Component Object Model |
|
blocks
|
Remote Service Session Hijacking |
|
blocks
|
SSH Hijacking |
|
blocks
|
RDP Hijacking |
|
blocks
|
System Services |
|
blocks
|
Launchctl |
|
blocks
|
Service Execution |
|
blocks
|
Hijack Execution Flow |
|
blocks
|
Executable Installer File Permissions Weakness |
|
blocks
|
Services File Permissions Weakness |
|
blocks
|
COR_PROFILER |
|
blocks
|
Modify Cloud Compute Infrastructure |
|
blocks
|
Create Snapshot |
|
blocks
|
Create Cloud Instance |
|
blocks
|
Delete Cloud Instance |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Infrastructure Discovery |
|
blocks
|
Network Boundary Bridging |
|
blocks
|
Network Address Translation Traversal |
|
blocks
|
Modify System Image |
|
blocks
|
Patch System Image |
|
blocks
|
Downgrade System Image |
|
blocks
|
Deploy Container |
|
blocks
|
Escape to Host |
|
blocks
|
Container and Resource Discovery |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Storage Object Discovery |
|
blocks
|
Multi-Factor Authentication Request Generation |
|
blocks
|
Serverless Execution |
|
blocks
|
Steal or Forge Authentication Certificates |
|
blocks
|
Cloud Administration Command |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Accountability / Attribution |
|
blocks
|
Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Privilege Elevation |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Access |
|
blocks
|
Identity Compromise / Impersonation |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity |
|
blocks
|
System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector) |
|
blocks
|
System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector) |
|
blocks
|
System / Service Compromise |
|
blocks
|
Intellectual Property / Trade Secret Loss |
|
blocks
|
Fraud / Theft / Direct Financial Loss |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability |
|
blocks
|
Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Data Integrity |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Data / Service Availability |
|
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
|
Physical Crime |
|
blocks
|
Utility Service Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Dysfunctional Management Practices |
|
blocks
|
Human Error |
|
blocks
|
Technical / Mechanical Failure |
|
blocks
|
Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning |
|
blocks
|
Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct |
|
blocks
|
Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct |
|
blocks
|
Infrastructure Failure / Degradation |
|
blocks
|
Cryptographic Compromise / Cryptanalytic Capability Advancement |
|
blocks
|
IAM-06.03B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.03AC |
|
blocks
|
IAM-08.01B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-08.07B |
|
is blocked by
|
IAC-32 Identification & Authentication for Organizational Users – Assessment Procedure |
|
blocks
|
IA-02 Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users) |
|
blocks
|
IA-02 [L] Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users) |
|
blocks
|
IA-02 [M] Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users) |
|
blocks
|
IA-02 [H] Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users) |
|
blocks
|
03.05.01 User Identification and Authentication |
|
blocks
|
03.05.05 Identifier Management |
|
blocks
|
PR.AA-01 Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed by the organization |
|
blocks
|
PR.AA-03 Users, services, and hardware are authenticated |
|
blocks
|
PR.AA-05 Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined in a policy, managed, enforced, and reviewed, and incorporate the principles of … |
- Secure Controls Framework -
"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.
|