|
+Separation of Maintenance Sessions |
Separation of Maintenance SessionsDescriptionMechanisms exist to protect maintenance sessions through replay-resistant sessions that are physically or logically separated communications paths from other network sessions.Possible Solutions & ConsiderationsMicro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2∙ Document maintenance activities in a logSmall Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4∙ Maintenance log∙ Authorized maintenance personnel list Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6∙ Formal maintenance management program∙ CMMS or ticketing system Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8∙ CMMS (e.g., Maximo, ServiceNow)∙ Scheduled maintenance program ∙ Vendor access controls Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9∙ Enterprise CMMS platform∙ Automated maintenance scheduling ∙ Vendor access controls ∙ Remote access controls SCR-CMMLevel 0 Not PerformedPractices 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 InformallyMaintenance (MNT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with MNT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Maintenance-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ Maintenance controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage change control processes associated with maintenance operations. Level 2 Planned TrackedSCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control:▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts). Level 3 Well DefinedMaintenance (MNT) 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 MNT 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 MNT domain capabilities (e.g., maintenance pans) are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ A centralized Change Management Office (CMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain MNT domain capabilities. ▪ Technical procedures (e.g., ITIL change enablement) are utilized along with change management governance capabilities to ensure successful, efficient and secure maintenance 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 MNT 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 protect maintenance sessions through replay-resistant sessions that are physically or logically separated communications paths from other network sessions. Level 4 Quantitatively ControlledUtilize 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 ImprovingUtilize 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. Übersicht
1.1 Referenzen1.2 Identifizierte Anforderungen1.3 Zugehörige Regulierungen2. Identifizierte Anforderungen
3. Zugehörige Regulierungen
Verknüpfte Vorgänge
|