+Άρθρο 91 Εξουσία αίτησης τεκμηρίωσης και πληροφοριών
---+Άρθρο 91 1.
---+Άρθρο 91 2.
---+Άρθρο 91 3.
---+Άρθρο 91 4.
---+Άρθρο 91 5.

Άρθρο 91 Εξουσία αίτησης τεκμηρίωσης και πληροφοριών

1. Επισκόπηση

,
Τίτλος Κανονισμός
Άρθρο 91 1.
Η Επιτροπή μπορεί να ζητήσει από τον πάροχο του σχετικού μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού να παράσχει την τεκμηρίωση που καταρτίζει ο πάροχος σύμφωνα με τα άρθρα 53 και 55 ή τυχόν πρόσθετες πληροφορίες που είναι αναγκαίες για την αξιολόγηση της συμμόρφωσης του παρόχου με τον παρόντα κανονισμό.
Άρθρο 91 2.
Πριν από την αποστολή του αιτήματος παροχής πληροφοριών, η Υπηρεσία ΤΝ μπορεί να ξεκινήσει διαρθρωμένο διάλογο με τον πάροχο του μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού.
Άρθρο 91 3.
Κατόπιν δεόντως αιτιολογημένου αιτήματος της επιστημονικής ομάδας, η Επιτροπή μπορεί να απευθύνει αίτημα παροχής πληροφοριών σε πάροχο μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού, όταν η πρόσβαση σε πληροφορίες είναι αναγκαία και αναλογική για την εκπλήρωση των καθηκόντων της επιστημονικής ομάδας δυνάμει του άρθρου 68 παράγραφος 2.
Άρθρο 91 4.
Το αίτημα παροχής πληροφοριών αναφέρει τη νομική βάση και τον σκοπό του αιτήματος, διευκρινίζει ποιες πληροφορίες απαιτούνται, ορίζει προθεσμία εντός της οποίας πρέπει να παρασχεθούν οι πληροφορίες και αναφέρει τα πρόστιμα που προβλέπονται στο άρθρο 101 για την παροχή ανακριβών, ελλιπών ή παραπλανητικών πληροφοριών.
Άρθρο 91 5.
Ο πάροχος του σχετικού μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού ή ο εκπρόσωπός του παρέχει τις ζητούμενες πληροφορίες. Στην περίπτωση νομικών προσώπων, εταιρειών ή επιχειρήσεων ή όταν ο πάροχος στερείται νομικής προσωπικότητας, τα πρόσωπα που είναι επιφορτισμένα με την εκπροσώπησή τους βάσει του νόμου ή του καταστατικού τους παρέχουν τις ζητούμενες πληροφορίες για λογαριασμό του παρόχου του σχετικού μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού. Πληροφορίες είναι δυνατόν να παρέχουν δεόντως εξουσιοδοτημένοι δικηγόροι για λογαριασμό των πελατών τους. Οι πελάτες ωστόσο εξακολουθούν να ευθύνονται πλήρως για την παροχή ανακριβών, ελλιπών ή παραπλανητικών πληροφοριών.

1.1 Παραπομπές

1.2 Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

1.3 Σχετικά πρότυπα

2. Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

Απαιτήσεις
Πηγή Απαίτηση

3. Σχετικά πρότυπα

Πρότυπα
Πηγή Απαίτηση
SCF Legal Assessment of Investigative Inquires

Description

Mechanisms exist to determine whether a government agency has an applicable and valid legal basis to request data from the organization and what further steps need to be taken, if necessary.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Compliance management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Compliance management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ External compliance requirements for cybersecurity and data privacy are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with the organization's legal counsel for guidance on how to respond to legal orders (e.g., court orders and investigations).

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ 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 CPL 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 determine whether a government agency has an applicable and valid legal basis to request data from the organization and what further steps need to be taken, if necessary.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize 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 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.
SCF Legal Assessment of Investigative Inquires

Description

Mechanisms exist to determine whether a government agency has an applicable and valid legal basis to request data from the organization and what further steps need to be taken, if necessary.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

∙ Legal review

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

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Compliance management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Compliance management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ External compliance requirements for cybersecurity and data privacy are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with the organization's legal counsel for guidance on how to respond to legal orders (e.g., court orders and investigations).

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ 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 CPL 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 determine whether a government agency has an applicable and valid legal basis to request data from the organization and what further steps need to be taken, if necessary.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize 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 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.