+Session Lock

Session Lock

Description

Mechanisms exist to initiate a session lock after an organization-defined time period of inactivity, or upon receiving a request from a user and retain the session lock until the user reestablishes access using established identification and authentication methods.

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)

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

∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)

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

∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC)

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.

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

Configuration Management (CFG) 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 CFG 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 CFG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A configuration management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CFG domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of configuration management operations (e.g., Configuration Management Database (CMBD) Asset Management 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 CFG 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 initiate a session lock after an organization-defined time period of inactivity, or upon receiving a request from a user and retain the session lock until the user reestablishes access using established identification and authentication methods.

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 13 Styring af netsikkerhed

Artikel 13

Styring af netsikkerhed

Som led i de sikkerhedsforanstaltninger, der garanterer netsikkerheden mod indtrængen og datamisbrug, udvikler, dokumenterer og gennemfører finansielle enheder politikker, procedurer, protokoller og værktøjer for styring af netsikkerhed, herunder alle følgende:

a) 

adskillelse og segmentering af IKT-systemer og -netværk under hensyntagen til:

i) 

hvor kritisk eller vigtig den funktion, som disse IKT-systemer og -netværk understøtter, er

ii) 

den klassificering, der er fastlagt i overensstemmelse med artikel 8, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2022/2554

iii) 

den samlede risikoprofil for IKT-aktiver, der anvender disse IKT-systemer og -netværk

b) 

dokumentation for alle den finansielle enheds netværksforbindelser og datastrømme

c) 

anvendelse af et særskilt og dertil indrettet netværk til administration af IKT-aktiver

d) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af netadgangskontroller, som skal forebygge og detektere forbindelser til den finansielle enheds netværk ved hjælp af en uautoriseret enhed eller et uautoriseret system eller ethvert endpoint, der ikke opfylder den finansielle enheds sikkerhedskrav

e) 

kryptering af netværksforbindelser, der passerer gennem virksomhedsnetværk, offentlige netværk, indenlandske netværk, tredjeparters netværk og trådløse net, til de anvendte kommunikationsprotokoller, idet der tages hensyn til resultaterne af den godkendte dataklassificering, resultaterne af IKT-risikovurderingen og krypteringen af de netforbindelser, der er omhandlet i artikel 6, stk. 2

f) 

udformningen af netværk i overensstemmelse med de krav til IKT-sikkerhed, der er fastsat af den finansielle enhed, idet der tages hensyn til førende praksis for at sikre fortroligheden, integriteten og tilgængeligheden af netværket

g) 

sikring af netværkstrafikken mellem de interne netværk og internettet og andre eksterne forbindelser

h) 

identifikation af roller og ansvarsområder og trin i forbindelse med specifikation, gennemførelse, godkendelse, ændring og revision af firewallregler og forbindelsesfiltre

i) 

udførelsen af gennemgange af netarkitekturen og af udformningen af netsikkerheden en gang om året, og regelmæssigt for mikrovirksomheder, med henblik på at identificere potentielle sårbarheder

j) 

foranstaltninger til midlertidig isolering, hvis det er nødvendigt, af delnet og af netværkskomponenter og -udstyr

k) 

gennemførelse af en sikker konfigurationsstandard for alle netværkskomponenter og hærdning af netværket og netværksudstyr i overensstemmelse med eventuelle leverandørinstruktioner, hvis det er relevant, standarder som defineret i artikel 2, nr. (1), i forordning (EU) nr. 1025/2012, og førende praksis

l) 

procedurer, som skal begrænse, låse og afslutte system- og fjernsessioner efter en bestemt periode uden aktivitet

m) 

for aftaler om netværkstjenester:

i) 

identifikation og specificering af foranstaltninger vedrørende IKT og informationssikkerhed, serviceniveauer og styringskrav til alle netværkstjenester

ii) 

om disse tjenesteydelser leveres af en koncernintern udbyder af IKT-tjenester eller af tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester.

Med henblik på litra h) foretager finansielle enheder regelmæssigt en gennemgang af firewallregler og forbindelsesfiltre i overensstemmelse med den klassificering, der er fastlagt i overensstemmelse med artikel 8, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2022/2554, og den overordnede risikoprofil for de involverede IKT-systemer. For IKT-systemer, der understøtter kritiske eller vigtige funktioner, efterprøver finansielle enheder mindst hver sjette måned, at de eksisterende firewallregler og forbindelsesfiltre er tilstrækkelige.
EULAW Artikel 18 Fysisk og miljømæssig sikkerhed
-

Linkede sager

Sagslinks
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 3 TACTICAL
blocks Remote Desktop Protocol
blocks RDP Hijacking
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks PSS-06.02B
is blocked by CFG-04.3 Session Lock – Assessment Procedure
blocks AC-02(05) Inactivity Logout
blocks AC-11 Device Lock
blocks AC-02(05) [M] Inactivity Logout
blocks AC-11 [M] Device Lock
blocks AC-02(05) [H] Inactivity Logout
blocks AC-11 [H] Device Lock
blocks 03.01.10 Device Lock
  • 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.