+Physical Access Control
---+Physical Access Device Inventories
|
Physical Access Control
Description
Physical access control mechanisms exist to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Physical security policy
∙ Door locks and key management
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Physical security policy
∙ Access log
∙ Visitor procedures
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PES 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 PES domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Physical security / facilities management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Physical security / facilities management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies primarily focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies ensure that only authorized personnel are allowed access to secure areas.
▪ A facilities maintenance team, or similar function, manages the operation of automated physical and environmental protection controls.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies are configured to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Level 3 Well Defined
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES 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 PES domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A facilities 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 physical and environmental security operations (e.g., facility management solution, visitor log management automation and proximity badge access).
▪ 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 PES 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 physical security capability exists to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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
| Bezeichnung |
Standard |
|
Physical Access Device Inventories
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to maintain an accurate inventory of all physical access devices (e.g., RFID cards, access fobs and door keys).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Key and badge log (spreadsheet) with holder name
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Key/badge inventory with issuance and return records
∙ Periodic reconciliation of issued devices
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Physical access control system badge inventory
∙ Key management log or key cabinet (e.g., KeyWatcher)
∙ Annual reconciliation
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ PACS credential inventory reconciled with HR roster
∙ Electronic key management system (e.g., Traka, KeyWatcher)
∙ Quarterly reconciliation
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise PACS credential lifecycle management
∙ Electronic key management with audit trail
∙ Automated reconciliation against identity system
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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with PES domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Physical security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Physical security controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards), focusing on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs).
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel implement appropriate physical security practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's technology assets and data.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
SCR-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 Defined
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES 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 PES domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A facilities 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 physical and environmental security operations (e.g., facility management solution, visitor log management automation and proximity badge access).
▪ 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 PES 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 maintain an accurate inventory of all physical access devices (e.g., RFID cards, access fobs and door keys).
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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.
▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.
▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
|
1.1 Referenzen
1.2 Identifizierte Anforderungen
1.3 Zugehörige Regulierungen
2. Identifizierte Anforderungen
Anforderungen
| Quelle |
Anforderung |
3. Zugehörige Regulierungen
Regulierungen
| Quelle |
Regulierung |
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 21 Zugangskontrolle
Artikel 21
Im Rahmen der Kontrolle der Zugangs- und Zugriffsrechte entwickeln, dokumentieren und implementieren die Finanzunternehmen Richtlinien, die alles Folgende vorsehen:
a)
die Zuweisung der Rechte auf Zugang zu IKT-Assets nach dem Grundsatz „Kenntnis nur, wenn nötig“ („Need-to-know“), nach dem Grundsatz der Nutzungsnotwendigkeit („Need-to-use“) und nach dem Grundsatz der minimalen Berechtigung („Least privileges“), auch für den Fern- und Notfallzugang,
b)
die Abtrennung der Aufgaben, einen ungerechtfertigten Zugang zu kritischen Daten zu verhindern oder die Zuweisung einer Kombination von Zugriffsrechten zu verhindern, die zur Umgehung von Kontrollen genutzt werden können,
c)
eine Bestimmung zur Zurechenbarkeit, die die Nutzung generischer und gemeinsam genutzter Nutzerkonten so weit wie möglich einschränkt und die sicherstellt, dass die in den IKT-Systemen vorgenommenen Handlungen jederzeit einem Nutzer zugeordnet werden können,
d)
eine Bestimmung zur Beschränkung des Zugangs zu IKT-Assets, die Kontrollen und Tools zur Verhinderung eines unbefugten Zugangs vorsieht,
e)
Kontoverwaltungsverfahren für die Gewährung, Änderung oder Entziehung von Zugangsrechten für Nutzerkonten und generische Konten, insbesondere auch für generische Administratorkonten, die alles Folgende beinhalten:
i)
die Zuweisung der Aufgaben und Zuständigkeiten für die Gewährung, Überprüfung und Entziehung von Zugangsrechten,
ii)
die Zuweisung eines bevorrechtigten Zugangs, eines Notfallzugangs und eines Administratorzugangs nach dem Grundsatz der Nutzungsnotwendigkeit oder ad hoc bei allen IKT-Systemen,
iii)
den umgehenden Entzug der Zugangsrechte bei Beendigung des Beschäftigungsverhältnisses oder wenn der Zugang nicht länger erforderlich ist,
iv)
die Aktualisierung der Zugangsrechte, wenn Änderungen notwendig sind, mindestens aber einmal jährlich bei allen IKT-Systemen mit Ausnahme derjenigen, die kritische oder wichtige Funktionen unterstützen, und mindestens alle sechs Monate bei IKT-Systemen, die kritische oder wichtige Funktionen unterstützen;
f)
Authentifizierungsmethoden, die alles Folgende vorsehen:
i)
die Nutzung von Authentifizierungsmethoden ist der gemäß Artikel 8 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2022/2554 vorgenommenen Klassifizierung und dem Gesamtrisikoprofil der IKT-Assets angemessen und trägt führenden Praktiken Rechnung,
ii)
die Nutzung starker Authentifizierungsmethoden entspricht den führenden Praktiken und Techniken für den Fernzugang zum Netz des Finanzunternehmens, für den bevorrechtigten Zugang, für den Zugang zu IKT-Assets, die kritische oder wichtige Funktionen unterstützen oder IKT-Assets, die öffentlich zugänglich sind,
g)
physische Zugangskontrollen, die Folgendes einschließen:
i)
die Identifizierung und Protokollierung natürlicher Personen mit Zugangsberechtigung für Räumlichkeiten, Rechenzentren und die vom Finanzunternehmen designierten sensiblen Bereiche, in denen IKT- und Informationsassets untergebracht sind,
ii)
die Gewährung der Rechte auf physischen Zugang zu kritischen IKT-Assets nur für befugte Personen nach dem Grundsatz „Kenntnis nur, wenn nötig“ und dem Grundsatz der minimalen Berechtigung sowie ad hoc,
iii)
die Überwachung des physischen Zugangs zu Räumlichkeiten, Rechenzentren und die vom Finanzunternehmen designierten sensiblen Bereiche, in denen IKT- und/oder Informationsassets untergebracht sind,
iv)
die Überprüfung der physischen Zugangsrechte, um zu gewährleisten, dass unnötige Zugangsrechte umgehend entzogen werden.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe e Ziffer i legen die Finanzunternehmen die Speicherfrist fest und tragen dabei den Geschäftszielen und den Zielen für die Informationssicherheit, den Gründen für die Protokollierung des Ereignisses und den Ergebnissen der IKT-Risikobewertung Rechnung.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe e Ziffer ii verwenden die Finanzunternehmen für die Ausführung administrativer Aufgaben in IKT-Systemen nach Möglichkeit spezielle Konten. Für das Management des bevorrechtigten Zugangs greifen die Finanzunternehmen soweit möglich und angemessen auf automatisierte Lösungen zurück.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe g Ziffer i müssen die Identifizierung und Protokollierung der Bedeutung der Räumlichkeiten, der Rechenzentren und der designierten sensiblen Bereiche und der Kritikalität der dort untergebrachten Geschäftstätigkeiten oder IKT-Systeme angemessen sein.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe g Ziffer iii muss die Überwachung der gemäß Artikel 8 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2022/2554 vorgenommenen Klassifizierung und der Kritikalität des Zugangsbereichs angemessen sein.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 32 Physische Sicherheit und Sicherheit vor Umweltereignissen
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 33 Zugangskontrolle
Artikel 33
Die in Artikel 16 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2022/2554 genannten Finanzunternehmen erarbeiten, dokumentieren und implementieren Verfahren für die Kontrolle des logischen und physischen Zugangs und setzen diese Verfahren durch, überwachen sie und überprüfen sie regelmäßig. Diese Verfahren umfassen die folgenden Elemente der Kontrolle des logischen und physischen Zugangs:
a)
Verwaltung der Rechte auf Zugang zu Informationsassets, IKT-Assets und den durch sie unterstützten Funktionen sowie zu kritischen Betriebsstandorten des Finanzunternehmens nach dem Grundsatz „Kenntnis nur, wenn nötig“ („Need-to-know“), nach dem Grundsatz der Nutzungsnotwendigkeit („Need-to-use“) und nach dem Grundsatz der minimalen Berechtigung („Least privileges“), auch für den Fern- und Notfallzugang;
b)
Zurechenbarkeit der Nutzer, die sicherstellt, dass die Nutzer, die Handlungen in den IKT-Systemen vorgenommen haben, identifiziert werden können;
c)
Kontoverwaltungsverfahren für die Gewährung, Veränderung oder Entziehung von Zugangsrechten für Nutzerkonten und generische Konten, insbesondere auch für generische Administratorkonten;
d)
Authentifizierungsmethoden, die der in Artikel 30 Absatz 1 genannten Klassifizierung und dem Gesamtrisikoprofil der IKT-Assets angemessen sind und auf führenden Praktiken beruhen;
e)
regelmäßige Überprüfung der Zugangsrechte und Entziehung nicht mehr benötigter Zugangsrechte.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe c weist das Finanzunternehmen den privilegierten Zugang, den Notfallzugang und den Administratorzugang bei allen IKT-Systemen nach dem Grundsatz der Nutzungsnotwendigkeit oder ad hoc zu und protokolliert den Zugang nach Maßgabe von Artikel 34 Absatz 1 Buchstabe f in einer Log-Datei.
Für die Zwecke von Buchstabe d wenden die Finanzunternehmen starke Authentifizierungsmethoden an, die sich auf führende Praktiken für den Fernzugriff auf das Netz der Finanzunternehmen, für den privilegierten Zugang und für den Zugang zu IKT-Assets zur Unterstützung kritischer oder wichtiger Funktionen stützen, die öffentlich verfügbar sind.
|
Verknüpfte Vorgänge
- 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.
|