+Test, Validate & Document Changes

Test, Validate & Document Changes

Description

Mechanisms exist to appropriately test and document proposed changes in a non-production environment before changes are implemented into production.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)

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

Change Management (CHG) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CHG domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Change management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Whenever possible, IT and/or cybersecurity personnel test changes to business-critical Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) on a similarly configured IT environment, prior to widespread production release of the change.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Change management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Change management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Business stakeholders and process owners ensure changes to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) within the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) are controlled through formal change control procedures.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to test controls after a change is implemented to ensure cybersecurity and/or data protection controls are operating properly.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to document the results from testing changes.

Level 3 Well Defined

Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A centralized Change Management Office (CMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CHG domain capabilities.
▪ Technical procedures (e.g., ITIL change enablement) are utilized along with change management governance capabilities (e.g., Change Advisory Board (CAB)) to ensure successful, efficient and secure change management operations.
▪ 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 CHG 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 appropriately test and document proposed changes in a non-production environment before changes are implemented in a production environment.

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 12 Logføring
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Styring af IKT-ændringer
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Styring af IKT-ændringer
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Styring af IKT-ændringer
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Styring af IKT-ændringer
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Styring af IKT-ændringer
-
EULAW Artikel 37 Anskaffelse, udvikling og vedligeholdelse af IKT-systemer

Artikel 37

Anskaffelse, udvikling og vedligeholdelse af IKT-systemer

De finansielle enheder, der er omhandlet i artikel 16, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2022/2554, udformer og gennemfører, hvis det er relevant, en procedure for anskaffelse, udvikling og vedligeholdelse af IKT-systemer efter en risikobaseret tilgang. Denne procedure skal:

a) 

inden erhvervelse eller udvikling af IKT-systemer finder sted, sikre, at de funktionelle og ikkefunktionelle krav, herunder informationssikkerhedskrav, er klart angivet og godkendt af den pågældende forretningsfunktion

b) 

sikre test og godkendelse af IKT-systemer forud for deres første anvendelse, og inden der indføres ændringer i produktionsmiljøet

c) 

angive foranstaltninger, som skal mindske risikoen for utilsigtet ændring eller forsætlig manipulation af IKT-systemer i forbindelse med udviklingen og gennemførelsen af disse IKT-systemer i produktionsmiljøet.

Linkede sager

Sagslinks
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Process
is related to Protect
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Revenue Loss
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Loss of Competitive Advantage
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
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 Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Third-Party Physical Security Disruption / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Harm from Unauthorized / Unintended Product or Service Use
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Data / Service Availability
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 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 Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
blocks OPS-27.01B
blocks DEV-03.01B
blocks DEV-07.01B
blocks DEV-07.02B
blocks DEV-07.04B
is blocked by CHG-07 Test, Validate & Document Changes – Assessment Procedure
blocks CM-03(02) Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
blocks CM-03(07) Review System Changes
blocks SA-08(31) Secure System Modification
blocks CM-03(02) [M] Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
blocks CM-03(02) [H] Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
blocks 03.04.03 Configuration Change Control
blocks 03.04.04 Impact Analyses
blocks 03.04.11 Information Location
blocks 03.04.07E Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
blocks ID.RA-07 Changes and exceptions are managed, assessed for risk impact, recorded, and tracked
  • 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.