+Network Security Controls (NSC)

Network Security Controls (NSC)

Description

Mechanisms exist to develop, govern & update procedures to facilitate the implementation of Network Security Controls (NSC).

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Basic firewall (home router or free pfSense)
∙ Network security policy

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

∙ Small business firewall (e.g., Cisco Meraki, Fortinet FortiGate)
∙ Network security policy

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

∙ Next-gen firewall (NGFW)
∙ Network segmentation
∙ IDS/IPS
∙ Network security standards

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

∙ Enterprise NGFW (e.g., Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet)
∙ Network security program
∙ IDS/IPS
∙ NAC

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

∙ Enterprise NGFW with threat intelligence feeds
∙ Zero-trust network architecture
∙ SIEM integration
∙ NAC
∙ SD-WAN

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.
▪ Administrative processes are used to configure boundary devices (e.g., firewalls and routers) to deny network traffic by default and allow network traffic by exception (e.g., deny all and permit by exception).
▪ Administrative processes enforce the use of human reviews for Access Control Lists (ACLs) and similar rulesets on a routine basis.
▪ Internet-facing technologies are governed no differently from internal network assets.
▪ 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 capability exists to develop, govern & update procedures to facilitate the implementation of Network Security Controls (NSC).

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Network Security (NET) 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. Oversigt

Titel Standard

1.1 Referencer

1.2 Identificerede krav

1.3 Relaterede reguleringer

2. Identificerede krav

Krav
Kilde Krav

3. Relaterede reguleringer

Reguleringer
Kilde Regulering
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 35 Data-, system- og netsikkerhed

Artikel 35

Data-, system- og netsikkerhed

De finansielle enheder, der er omhandlet i artikel 16, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2022/2554, udvikler og gennemfører som en del af deres systemer, protokoller og værktøjer sikkerhedsforanstaltninger, der garanterer netsikkerheden mod indtrængen og datamisbrug, og som bevarer tilgængeligheden, autenticiteten, integriteten og fortroligheden af data. Navnlig indfører finansielle enheder under hensyntagen til den klassificering, der er omhandlet i denne forordnings artikel 30, stk. 1, alt følgende:

a) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af foranstaltninger til beskyttelse af data, som i brug, under overførsel og inaktive

b) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af sikkerhedsforanstaltninger med henblik på brugen af software, datalagringsmedier, -systemer og endpoint-enheder til at overføre og lagre den finansielle enheds data

c) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af foranstaltninger til forebyggelse og detektion af uautoriserede forbindelser til den finansielle enheds netværk og til sikring af nettrafikken mellem den finansielle enheds interne netværk og internettet og andre eksterne forbindelser

d) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af foranstaltninger, der sikrer tilgængeligheden, autenticiteten, integriteten og fortroligheden af data i forbindelse med under overførsel på nettet

e) 

proces for sikker sletning af data, der findes i den finansielle enheds lokaler eller lagres eksternt, som den finansielle enhed ikke længere behøver at indsamle eller lagre

f) 

en proces til sikker bortskaffelse eller demontering af datalagringsenheder i lokaler eller datalagringsenheder, der er lagret eksternt, og som indeholder fortrolige oplysninger

g) 

identifikation og gennemførelse af foranstaltninger til at sikre, at telearbejde og brugen af private endpoint-enheder ikke har en negativ indvirkning på den finansielle enheds evne til at udøve sine kritiske aktiviteter på en passende, rettidig og sikker måde.

EULAW Artikel 21 Foranstaltninger til styring af cybersikkerhedsrisici
-

Linkede sager

Sagslinks
Linktype Sag
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 Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unauthorized Access
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 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 Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
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 Incident Response / Recovery Cost
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
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to Govern
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks Lack of a security-minded workforce
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks COS-02.01B
blocks COS-03.03B
is blocked by NET-02 Network Security Controls (NSC) – Assessment Procedure
blocks SC-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks 03.01.12 Remote Access
blocks 03.01.16 Wireless Access
blocks 03.01.18 Access Control for Mobile Devices
blocks 03.13.01 Boundary Protection
blocks PR.IR-01 Networks and environments are protected from unauthorized logical access and usage
  • 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.