+Network Segmentation (macrosegmentation)
---+Security Management Subnets
|
Network Segmentation (macrosegmentation)
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement network segmentation within network architectures to isolate Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) from other network resources.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Subnetting
∙ Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Subnetting
∙ Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Subnetting
∙ Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Subnetting
∙ Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Subnetting
∙ Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)
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
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 segmentation exists to implement separate network addresses (e.g., different subnets) to connect TAASD in different security domains (e.g., sensitive/regulated data environments).
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity architects maintain a segmented development network to ensure a secure development environment.
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 ensure network architecture utilizes network segmentation to isolate Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) to protect from other network resources.
Mechanisms exist to implement network segmentation within network architectures to isolate Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) from other network resources.
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 |
|
Security Management Subnets
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement security management subnets to isolate security tools and support components from other internal system components by implementing separate subnetworks with managed interfaces to other components of the system.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Separate VLAN or network for management interfaces of firewall/switches where supported
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Dedicated management VLAN for security tools and infrastructure devices
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Separate management network or VLAN for security management
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Dedicated security management subnet
∙ Out-of-band management access controls
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise out-of-band management network
∙ Dedicated jump servers
∙ Privileged access workstations (PAW)
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.
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.
▪ Processing and storage of service location, including a managed security zone to house cybersecurity and data protection tools.
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 implement security management subnets to isolate security tools and support components from other internal system components by implementing separate subnetworks with managed interfaces to other components of the system.
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.
|
1.1 Referencer
1.2 Identificerede krav
1.3 Relaterede reguleringer
2. Identificerede krav
3. Relaterede reguleringer
Reguleringer
| Kilde |
Regulering |
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 13 Styring af netsikkerhed
Artikel 13
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.
|
Linkede sager
- 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.
|