+Threat Intelligence Program
|
Threat Intelligence Program
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Subscribe to free threat intelligence feeds (e.g., CISA alerts)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ CISA alerts subscription
∙ Basic threat awareness program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Threat intelligence program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Threat intelligence program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Threat intelligence program
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
Threat Management (THR) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with THR domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Threat management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with THR 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 THR domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Threat management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Threat management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
Level 3 Well Defined
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR 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 THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty 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 THR 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 implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Threat Management (THR) 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
1.1 Referencer
1.2 Identificerede krav
1.3 Relaterede reguleringer
2. Identificerede krav
3. Relaterede reguleringer
Reguleringer
| Kilde |
Regulering |
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 2 Generelle elementer i IKT-sikkerhedspolitikker, -procedurer, -protokoller og -værktøjer
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 3 IKT-risikostyring
Artikel 3
Finansielle enheder udvikler, dokumenterer og gennemfører IKT-risikostyringspolitikker og -procedurer, som skal indeholde alle følgende:
a)
en angivelse af godkendelsen af det risikotoleranceniveau for IKT-risiko, der er fastsat i overensstemmelse med artikel 6, stk. 8, litra b), i forordning (EU) 2022/2554
b)
en procedure for og metode til gennemførelse af IKT-risikovurdering, der identificerer:
i)
sårbarheder og trusler, der påvirker eller kan påvirke de understøttede forretningsfunktioner, IKT-systemer og IKT-aktiver, der understøtter disse funktioner
ii)
de kvantitative eller kvalitative indikatorer til måling af indvirkningen af og sandsynligheden for de sårbarheder og trusler, der er omhandlet i nr. i)
c)
proceduren for identifikation, gennemførelse og dokumentation af foranstaltninger til IKT-risikobehandling med henblik på de identificerede og vurderede IKT-risici, herunder fastlæggelse af de foranstaltninger til IKT-risikobehandling, der er nødvendige for, at IKT-risikoen holdes inden for det risikotoleranceniveau, der er omhandlet i litra a)
d)
for de resterende IKT-risici, der stadig er til stede efter gennemførelsen af de foranstaltninger til IKT-risikobehandling, der er omhandlet i litra c):
i)
bestemmelser om identifikation af disse resterende IKT-risici
ii)
tildeling af roller og ansvarsområder vedrørende:
1)
accepten af de resterende IKT-risici, der overskrider den finansielle enheds risikotoleranceniveau, jf. litra a),
2)
den proces for gennemgang, der er omhandlet i dette litra d), nr. iv)
iii)
udarbejdelse af en fortegnelse over de accepterede resterende IKT-risici, herunder en begrundelse for accepten heraf
iv)
bestemmelser om gennemgangen af de accepterede resterende IKT-risici mindst én gang om året, herunder:
1)
identifikation af eventuelle ændringer i de resterende IKT-risici
2)
vurderingen af tilgængelige afbødende foranstaltninger
3)
vurderingen af, om begrundelserne for accept af resterende IKT-risici stadig er gyldige og gældende på datoen for gennemgangen
e)
bestemmelser om overvågning af:
i)
eventuelle ændringer i IKT-risikoen og cybertrusselsbilledet
ii)
interne og eksterne sårbarheder og trusler:
iii)
den finansielle enheds IKT-risiko, der muliggør hurtig detektion af ændringer, der kan påvirke dens IKT-risikoprofil
f)
bestemmelser om en proces, der skal sikre, at der tages hensyn til eventuelle ændringer af den finansielle enheds forretningsstrategi og strategi for digital operationel modstandsdygtighed.
Med henblik på stk. 1, litra c), skal den procedure, der er omhandlet i nævnte litra, sikre:
a)
overvågning, om de gennemførte foranstaltninger til IKT-risikobehandling er effektive
b)
vurdering af, om den finansielle enheds fastsatte risikotoleranceniveauer er nået
c)
vurdering af, om den finansielle enhed har truffet foranstaltninger til at korrigere eller forbedre disse foranstaltninger, hvis det er nødvendigt.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 23 Detektion af anormale aktiviteter og kriterier for detektion af og reaktion af IKT-relaterede hændelser
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 31 IKT-risikostyring
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 34 Sikkerhed i forbindelse med IKT-operationer
Artikel 34
Sikkerhed i forbindelse med IKT-operationer
De finansielle enheder, der er omhandlet i artikel 16, stk. 1, i forordning (EU) 2022/2554, gør følgende som en del af deres systemer, protokoller og værktøjer og for alle IKT-aktiver:
a)
overvåger og forvalter livscyklussen for alle IKT-aktiver
b)
overvåger, om IKT-aktiverne understøttes af tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester fra finansielle enheder, hvis det er relevant
c)
identificerer kapacitetskrav til deres IKT-aktiver og foranstaltninger til at opretholde og forbedre IKT-systemernes tilgængelighed og effektivitet og forebygge mangel på IKT-kapacitet, inden de forekommer
d)
foretager automatiseret sårbarhedsscanning og automatiserede vurderinger af IKT-aktiver, som står i rimeligt forhold til deres klassificering, jf. artikel 30, stk. 1, og til IKT-aktivets overordnede risikoprofil, og tager korrektioner i brug for at afhjælpe konstaterede sårbarheder
e)
styrer de risici, der er forbundet med forældede, ikkeunderstøttede eller legacy-IKT-aktiver
f)
logfører hændelser, som vedrører logisk og fysisk adgangskontrol, IKT-operationer, herunder system- og netværkstrafikaktiviteter, og styring af IKT-ændringer
g)
identificerer og gennemfører foranstaltninger til overvågning og analyse af oplysninger om anormale aktiviteter og anormal adfærd, som vedrører kritiske eller vigtige IKT-operationer
h)
gennemfører foranstaltninger til overvågning af relevante og ajourførte oplysninger om cybertrusler
i)
gennemfører foranstaltninger til at konstatere mulige informationslækager, ondsindede kodetyper og andre sikkerhedstrusler og offentligt kendte sårbarheder i software og hardware og tjekker, om der findes dertil svarende nye sikkerhedsopdateringer.
Med henblik på litra f) tilpasser finansielle enheder logfilernes detaljeringsgrad i forhold til deres formål og anvendelse af det IKT-aktiv, der producerer disse logfiler.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 13 Læring og udvikling
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 45 Ordninger for informationsudveksling af oplysninger og efterretninger om cybertrusler
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 13 1
1. De finansielle enheder sørger for at råde over kapaciteter og personale, som kan indsamle oplysninger om sårbarheder og cybertrusler, IKT-relaterede hændelser, navnlig cyberangreb, og analysere de virkninger, de forventes at have på deres digitale operationelle modstandsdygtighed.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 45 1
1. De finansielle enheder kan indbyrdes udveksle oplysninger og efterretninger om cybertrusler, herunder kompromitteringsindikatorer, taktikker, teknikker og procedurer, cybersikkerhedsvarsler og konfigurationsværktøjer, i det omfang en sådan udveksling af oplysninger og efterretninger:
|
a)
|
har til formål at forbedre finansielle enheders digitale operationelle modstandsdygtighed, navnlig ved at øge bevidstheden om cybertrusler, begrænse eller hindre cybertruslernes spredningsevne, understøtte forsvarskapaciteter, teknikker til detektion af trusler, strategier for afbødning eller indsats- og genopretningsfaser
|
|
b)
|
finder sted inden for betroede fællesskaber af finansielle enheder
|
|
c)
|
gennemføres gennem ordninger for informationsudveksling, der beskytter de udvekslede oplysningers potentielt sensitive karakter, og som er omfattet af adfærdsregler med fuld respekt for forretningshemmeligheder, beskyttelse af personoplysninger i overensstemmelse med forordning (EU) 2016/679 og retningslinjer for konkurrencepolitikken.
|
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 45 2
2. Med henblik på stk. 1, litra c), fastlægger ordningerne for informationsudveksling betingelserne for deltagelse og fastsætter, hvor det er relevant, de nærmere bestemmelser om inddragelse af offentlige myndigheder og om den egenskab, i hvilken de kan indgå i ordninger for informationsudveksling, om inddragelse af tredjepartsudbydere af IKT-tjenester og om operationelle elementer, herunder anvendelsen af særlige IT-platforme.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 45 3
3. De finansielle enheder underretter de kompetente myndigheder om deres deltagelse i de i stk. 1 omhandlede ordninger for informationsudveksling efter validering af deres medlemskab eller, alt efter hvad der er relevant, ophør af deres medlemskab, når det træder i kraft.
|
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.
|