+Status Reporting To Governing Body

Status Reporting To Governing Body

Description

Mechanisms exist to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations enabling executives to make decisions about matters considered material to the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP).

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Simple security status dashboard (spreadsheet or slide deck)
∙ Email status updates to owner/manager

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

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Structured security metrics report (incidents, patching status, training completion)
∙ Documented reporting cadence

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

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Formal security status reports to leadership
∙ KPI/KRI dashboard (e.g., Power BI, Tableau, or GRC tool reporting)

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

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Executive security dashboard with KPIs/KRIs
∙ Board-level reporting on material risk indicators
∙ Automated reporting via GRC platform

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

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Board and audit committee cybersecurity briefings
∙ Integrated GRC dashboard with real-time metrics
∙ SEC cybersecurity disclosure-ready reporting processes (if applicable)

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

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.
▪ Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to trends.

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 provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP).

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. Oversigt

1.1 Referencer

1.2 Identificerede krav

1.3 Relaterede reguleringer

2. Identificerede krav

Krav

3. Relaterede reguleringer

Reguleringer
EULAW Artikel 15 Styring af IKT-projekter
-
EULAW Artikel 25 Test af politikken for IKT-driftsstabilitet
-
EULAW Artikel 27 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af rammen for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 27 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af rammen for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 28 Forvaltning og organisation
-
EULAW Artikel 40 Test af planer for driftsstabilitet
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 41 Format og indhold af rapporten om gennemgangen af den forenklede ramme for IKT-risikostyring
-
EULAW Artikel 5 Forvaltning og organisation
-
EULAW Artikel 13 Læring og udvikling
-
EULAW Artikel 5 2

2.   Ledelsesorganet i den finansielle enhed fastlægger, godkender, fører tilsyn med og har ansvar for gennemførelsen af alle ordninger vedrørende de rammer for IKT-risikostyring, der er omhandlet i artikel 6, stk. 1.

Med henblik på første afsnit er det ledelsesorganet, som

a)

har det endelige ansvar for styringen af den finansielle enheds IKT-risiko

b)

indfører politikker, der har til formål at sikre opretholdelse af høje standarder for tilgængeligheden, autenticiteten, integriteten og fortroligheden af data

c)

fastlægger klare roller og ansvarsområder for alle IKT-relaterede funktioner og etablerer passende forvaltningsordninger for at sikre effektiv og rettidig kommunikation, samarbejde og koordinering mellem disse funktioner

d)

har det samlede ansvar for fastlæggelse og godkendelse af strategien for digital operationel modstandsdygtighed, jf. artikel 6, stk. 8, herunder fastsættelse af et passende risikotoleranceniveau for IKT-risiko i den finansielle enhed, jf. artikel 6, stk. 8, litra b)

e)

godkender, fører tilsyn med og regelmæssigt gennemgår gennemførelsen af den finansielle enheds politik for IKT-driftsstabilitet og planer for IKT-indsats og -genopretning, jf. henholdsvis artikel 11, stk. 1 og 3, der kan vedtages som en særlig specifik politik, der udgør en integrerende del af den finansielle enheds samlede politik for driftsstabilitet og indsats- og genopretningsplan

f)

godkender og regelmæssigt gennemgår den finansielle enheds interne IKT-revisionsplaner, IKT-revisioner og væsentlige ændringer heraf

g)

tildeler og regelmæssigt gennemgår et passende budget for at opfylde den finansielle enheds behov i forbindelse med digital operationel modstandsdygtighed med hensyn til alle ressourcetyper, herunder relevante IKT-programmer til bevidstgørelse om IKT-sikkerhed og kurser i digital operationel modstandsdygtighed, jf. artikel 13, stk. 6, og IKT-færdigheder for alt personale

h)

godkender og regelmæssigt gennemgår den finansielle enheds politik vedrørende ordninger for brug af IKT-tjenester, der leveres af tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester

i)

indfører indberetningskanaler på virksomhedsniveau, der gør det muligt for det at blive behørigt underrettet om følgende:

i)

ordninger, der er indgået med tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester vedrørende brugen af IKT-tjenester

ii)

relevante planlagte væsentlige ændringer, som vedrører tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester

iii)

potentielle virkninger af sådanne ændringer på de kritiske eller vigtige funktioner, der er omfattet af disse ordninger, herunder en sammenfatning af risikoanalysen med henblik på at vurdere virkningerne af disse ændringer og som minimum større IKT-relaterede hændelser og deres virkninger samt indsatsforanstaltninger, genopretningsforanstaltninger og korrigerende foranstaltninger.
EULAW Artikel 13 5

5.   Højtstående IKT-personale skal mindst én gang om året aflægge rapport til ledelsesorganet om de i stk. 3 omhandlede resultater og fremsætte anbefalinger.

Linkede sager

Sagslinks
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 05
is related to Process
is related to Govern
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Failure to Achieve Strategic / Mission Objectives
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
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 Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Economic Shock / Market Disruption
blocks Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI)
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OIS-01.02B
blocks OIS-08.01AC
blocks BCM-01.04B
blocks COM-04.01B
blocks COM-04.02AC
is blocked by GOV-09.1 Status Reporting To Governing Body – Assessment Procedure
blocks 03.12.03 Continuous Monitoring
blocks GV.OV Oversight
blocks GV.OV-01 Cybersecurity risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed to inform and adjust strategy and direction
blocks GV.OV-03 Organizational cybersecurity risk management performance is evaluated and reviewed for adjustments needed
blocks GV.SC Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management
blocks GV.SC-09 Supply chain security practices are integrated into cybersecurity and enterprise risk management programs, and their performance is monitored …
blocks ID IDENTIFY
  • 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.