+Review of Third-Party Services

Review of Third-Party Services

Description

Mechanisms exist to monitor, regularly review and assess External Service Providers (ESPs) for compliance with established contractual requirements for security, compliance and resilience controls.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) 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

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

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Asset 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

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor management 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 TPM 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 monitor, regularly review and assess External Service Providers (ESPs) for compliance with established contractual requirements for security, compliance and resilience controls.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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. Übersicht

1.1 Referenzen

1.2 Identifizierte Anforderungen

1.3 Zugehörige Regulierungen

2. Identifizierte Anforderungen

Anforderungen

3. Zugehörige Regulierungen

Regulierungen
EULAW Artikel 10 Schwachstellen- und Patch-Management
-
EULAW Artikel 28 Allgemeine Prinzipien
-
EULAW Artikel 30 Wesentliche Vertragsbestimmungen
-
EULAW Artikel 21 Risikomanagementmaßnahmen im Bereich der Cybersicherheit
-
EULAW Artikel 28 (6)
Bei der Ausübung der Zugangs-, Inspektions- und Auditrechte in Bezug auf den IKT-Drittdienstleister bestimmen Finanzunternehmen auf der Grundlage eines risikobasierten Ansatzes vorab die Häufigkeit von Audits und Inspektionen sowie die zu prüfenden Bereiche, indem allgemein anerkannte Auditstandards im Einklang mit etwaigen Aufsichtsanweisungen für die Anwendung und Einbeziehung solcher Auditstandards eingehalten werden.

Wenn vertragliche Vereinbarungen über die Nutzung von IKT-Dienstleistungen, die mit IKT-Drittdienstleistern geschlossen werden, ein hohes Maß an technischer Komplexität mit sich bringen, überprüft das Finanzunternehmen, dass die internen oder externen Revisoren oder ein Revisorenpool über die Fähigkeiten und Kenntnisse verfügen bzw. verfügt, die für die wirksame Durchführung der einschlägigen Audits und Bewertungen erforderlich sind.
EULAW Artikel 30 (3)

Die vertraglichen Vereinbarungen über die Nutzung von IKT-Dienstleistungen zur Unterstützung kritischer oder wichtiger Funktionen umfassen zusätzlich zu den in Absatz 2 genannten Elementen mindestens Folgendes:

a) 

vollständige Beschreibungen der Dienstleistungsgüte, einschließlich Aktualisierungen und Überarbeitungen, mit präzisen quantitativen und qualitativen Leistungszielen innerhalb der vereinbarten Dienstleistungsgüte, um dem Finanzunternehmen eine wirksame Überwachung von IKT-Dienstleistungen und das unverzügliche Ergreifen angemessener Korrekturmaßnahmen zu ermöglichen, wenn eine vereinbarte Dienstleistungsgüte nicht erreicht wird;

b) 

Kündigungsfristen und Berichtspflichten des IKT-Drittdienstleisters gegenüber dem Finanzunternehmen, einschließlich der Meldung aller Entwicklungen, die sich wesentlich auf die Fähigkeit des IKT-Drittdienstleisters, IKT-Dienstleistungen zur Unterstützung kritischer oder wichtiger Funktionen gemäß den vereinbarten Leistungsniveaus wirksam bereitzustellen, auswirken könnten;

c) 

Anforderungen an den IKT-Drittdienstleister, Notfallpläne zu implementieren und zu testen und über Maßnahmen, Tools und Leit- und Richtlinien für IKT-Sicherheit zu verfügen, die ein angemessenes Maß an Sicherheit für die Erbringung von Dienstleistungen durch das Finanzunternehmen im Einklang mit seinem Rechtsrahmen bieten;

d) 

die Verpflichtung des IKT-Drittdienstleisters, sich an den in den Artikeln 26 und 27 genannten TLPT des Finanzunternehmens zu beteiligen und uneingeschränkt daran mitzuwirken;

e) 

das Recht, die Leistung des IKT-Drittdienstleisters fortlaufend zu überwachen, wozu Folgendes gehört:

i) 

uneingeschränkte Zugangs-, Inspektions- und Auditrechte des Finanzunternehmens oder eines beauftragten Dritten und der zuständigen Behörde sowie das Recht auf Anfertigung von Kopien einschlägiger Unterlagen vor Ort, wenn ihnen für die Geschäftstätigkeit des IKT-Drittdienstleisters entscheidende Bedeutung zukommt, wobei die tatsächliche Ausübung dieser Rechte nicht durch andere vertragliche Vereinbarungen oder Umsetzungsrichtlinien behindert oder eingeschränkt wird;

ii) 

das Recht, alternative Bestätigungsniveaus zu vereinbaren, wenn die Rechte anderer Kunden betroffen sind;

iii) 

die Verpflichtung des IKT-Drittdienstleisters zur uneingeschränkten Zusammenarbeit bei Vor-Ort-Inspektionen und Audits, die von den zuständigen Behörden, der federführenden Überwachungsbehörde, dem Finanzunternehmen oder einem beauftragten Dritten durchgeführt werden; und

iv) 

die Verpflichtung, Einzelheiten zu Umfang und Häufigkeit dieser Inspektionen sowie dem dabei zu befolgenden Verfahren mitzuteilen;

f) 

Ausstiegsstrategien, insbesondere die Festlegung eines verbindlichen angemessenen Übergangszeitraums,

i) 

in dem der IKT-Drittdienstleister weiterhin die entsprechenden Funktionen oder IKT-Dienstleistungen bereitstellt, um das Risiko von Störungen im Finanzunternehmen zu verringern oder um dessen geordnete Abwicklung und Umstrukturierung sicherzustellen;

ii) 

der dem Finanzunternehmen ermöglicht, zu einem anderen IKT-Drittdienstleister zu wechseln oder auf interne Lösungen umzustellen, die der Komplexität der erbrachten Dienstleistung entsprechen.

Abweichend von Buchstabe e können der IKT-Drittdienstleister und das Finanzunternehmen, das ein Kleinstunternehmen ist, vereinbaren, dass die Zugangs-, Inspektions- und Auditrechte des Finanzunternehmens auf einen unabhängigen Dritten übertragen werden können, der vom IKT-Drittdienstleister benannt wird, sowie dass das Finanzunternehmen von diesem Dritten jederzeit Informationen und Gewähr in Bezug auf die Leistung des IKT-Drittdienstleisters verlangen kann.

Verknüpfte Vorgänge

Verknüpfungen
is related to Semi-Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Process
is related to Identify
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of internal controls
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
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 Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Economic Shock / Market Disruption
blocks Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI)
blocks Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention
blocks Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-01.06B
blocks DEV-02.01AC
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-04.01B
blocks SSO-05.01B
blocks SSO-05.02B
blocks SSO-05.03B
blocks SSO-05.04B
blocks SSO-05.07B
blocks SSO-05.01AC
blocks SSO-05.03AC
blocks SSO-06.02B
is blocked by TPM-15 Review of Third-Party Services – Assessment Procedure
blocks SR-06 Supplier Assessments and Reviews
blocks SR-06(01) Testing and Analysis
blocks SR-06 [M] Supplier Assessments and Reviews
blocks SR-06 [H] Supplier Assessments and Reviews
blocks 03.16.03 External System Services
blocks 03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods
blocks GV.SC-07 The risks posed by a supplier, their products and services, and other third parties are understood, recorded, prioritized, assessed, responded to, …
blocks ID.IM-01 Improvements are identified from evaluations
blocks ID.IM-02 Improvements are identified from security tests and exercises, including those done in coordination with suppliers and relevant third parties
  • 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.