+User Provisioning & De-Provisioning
---+Change of Roles & Duties
---+Termination of Employment

User Provisioning & De-Provisioning

Description

Mechanisms exist to utilize a formal user registration and de-registration process that governs the assignment of access rights.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Documented process for adding/removing user access

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

∙ User provisioning and de-provisioning procedure
∙ Timely removal of access on departure

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

∙ Formal user lifecycle management process
∙ Provisioning workflows
∙ Timely de-provisioning

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

∙ Enterprise IAM with automated provisioning/de-provisioning (e.g., SailPoint, Saviynt)

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

∙ Enterprise IGA platform (e.g., SailPoint, Saviynt, Microsoft Entra ID Governance)
∙ Automated lifecycle management
∙ Role-based access provisioning

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

Identification & Authentication (IAC) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IAC domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IAM controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage accounts and permissions.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel identify and implement IAM cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC).
▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services.
▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.
▪ IAM restricts the assignment of privileged accounts to entity-defined personnel and/or roles (privilege assignment requires management approval).

Level 3 Well Defined

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 utilize a formal user registration and de-registration process that governs the assignment of access rights.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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. Επισκόπηση

Τίτλος Πρότυπο
Change of Roles & Duties

Description

Mechanisms exist to revoke user access rights following changes in personnel roles and duties, if no longer necessary or permitted.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Update access rights promptly when roles change

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

∙ Access change procedure for role changes
∙ Notify IT/security of role changes

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

∙ Formal access modification process for role changes
∙ Timely access updates

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

∙ Enterprise IAM with role-change workflow integration with HR
∙ Automated access adjustment

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

∙ Enterprise IGA platform with HR integration
∙ Automated role-change access adjustments
∙ Access certification

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

Identification & Authentication (IAC) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IAC domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IAM controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage accounts and permissions.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel identify and implement IAM cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements.
▪ Active Directory (AD), or a similar technologies, are used to centrally manage identities and permissions, but asset/process owners are authorized to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC).
▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services.
▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.

Level 3 Well Defined

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 revoke user access rights following changes in personnel roles and duties, if no longer necessary or permitted.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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.
Termination of Employment

Description

Mechanisms exist to revoke user access rights in a timely manner, upon termination of employment or contract.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Revoke all access immediately upon employee termination

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

∙ Documented termination procedure with immediate access revocation

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

∙ Formal termination checklist
∙ Same-day access revocation process

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

∙ Enterprise automated offboarding workflow
∙ HR-to-IAM integration for immediate access revocation

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

∙ Enterprise IGA with automated offboarding
∙ HR system integration
∙ Immediate access revocation across all systems
∙ Exit interview and access audit

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

Identification & Authentication (IAC) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IAC domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IAM controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to manage accounts and permissions.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel identify and implement IAM cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements.
▪ Active Directory (AD), or a similar technologies, are used to centrally manage identities and permissions, but asset/process owners are authorized to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Identity & Access Management (IAM)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines) to enforce Logical Access Control (LAC).
▪ IAM may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel to implement Role Based Access Control (RBAC) practices for the management of user, group and system accounts, including privileged accounts.
▪ A directory services technology is used to centrally manage identities and permissions with RBAC. Due to technical or business limitations, asset/process owners are empowered to operate a decentralized access control program for their specific Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that cannot be integrated into directory services.
▪ Configuration management and IAM functions collaborate to ensure Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce “least privileges” on TAAS.

Level 3 Well Defined

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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 IAC 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 IAC domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ An Identity & Access Management (IAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IAC domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of IAM operations (e.g., directory services, Authenticate, Authorize and Audit (AAA) 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 IAC 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 revoke user access rights in a timely manner, upon termination of employment or contract.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Identification & Authentication (IAC) 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.

1.1 Παραπομπές

1.2 Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

1.3 Σχετικοί κανονισμοί

2. Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

Απαιτήσεις
Πηγή Απαίτηση

3. Σχετικοί κανονισμοί

Κανονισμοί
Πηγή Κανονισμός
EULAW Άρθρο 20 Διαχείριση ταυτότητας
EULAW Άρθρο 21 Έλεγχος πρόσβασης

Άρθρο 21

Έλεγχος πρόσβασης

Στο πλαίσιο του ελέγχου της διαχείρισης δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης, οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες αναπτύσσουν, τεκμηριώνουν και εφαρμόζουν πολιτική που περιλαμβάνει όλα τα ακόλουθα:

α) 

την εκχώρηση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης σε πόρους ΤΠΕ με βάση τις αρχές της ανάγκης γνώσης, της ανάγκης χρήσης και των ελάχιστων προνομίων, μεταξύ άλλων για την εξ αποστάσεως πρόσβαση και την πρόσβαση έκτακτης ανάγκης·

β) 

τον διαχωρισμό των καθηκόντων που έχουν σχεδιαστεί για την πρόληψη της αδικαιολόγητης πρόσβασης σε κρίσιμα δεδομένα ή για την αποτροπή της κατανομής συνδυασμών δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης που ενδέχεται να χρησιμοποιηθούν για την παράκαμψη ελέγχων·

γ) 

διάταξη σχετικά με τη λογοδοσία χρήστη, περιορίζοντας στο μέτρο του δυνατού τη χρήση γενικών και κοινών λογαριασμών χρήστη και διασφαλίζοντας ότι ανά πάσα στιγμή μπορεί να εξακριβωθεί η ταυτότητα των χρηστών σε σχέση με τις ενέργειες που εκτελούνται στα συστήματα ΤΠΕ·

δ) 

διάταξη σχετικά με τους περιορισμούς της πρόσβασης σε πόρους ΤΠΕ, καθορίζοντας δικλείδες ασφαλείας και εργαλεία για την πρόληψη της μη εξουσιοδοτημένης πρόσβασης·

ε) 

διαδικασίες διαχείρισης λογαριασμών για τη χορήγηση, την αλλαγή ή την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης για λογαριασμούς χρήστη και γενικούς λογαριασμούς, μεταξύ άλλων γενικούς λογαριασμούς διαχειριστή, συμπεριλαμβανομένης διάταξης για όλα τα ακόλουθα:

i) 

την ανάθεση ρόλων και αρμοδιοτήτων για τη χορήγηση, την επανεξέταση και την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης·

ii) 

την εκχώρηση προνομιακής πρόσβασης, πρόσβασης έκτακτης ανάγκης και διαχειριστή με βάση την ανάγκη χρήσης ή ad hoc για όλα τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ·

iii) 

την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης χωρίς αδικαιολόγητη καθυστέρηση μετά τη λήξη της απασχόλησης ή όταν η πρόσβαση δεν είναι πλέον απαραίτητη·

iv) 

την επικαιροποίηση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης όταν απαιτούνται αλλαγές και τουλάχιστον μία φορά ετησίως για όλα τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ, εκτός από τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες και τουλάχιστον κάθε 6 μήνες για συστήματα ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες·

στ) 

μεθόδους επαλήθευσης ταυτότητας, συμπεριλαμβανομένων όλων των ακόλουθων στοιχείων:

i) 

της χρήσης μεθόδων επαλήθευσης ταυτότητας ανάλογων με την ταξινόμηση που καθορίζεται σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 8 παράγραφος 1 του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) 2022/2554 και με το συνολικό προφίλ κινδύνου των πόρων ΤΠΕ και με συνεκτίμηση κορυφαίων πρακτικών·

ii) 

της χρήσης μεθόδων ισχυρής αυθεντικοποίησης σύμφωνα με κορυφαίες πρακτικές και τεχνικές για την εξ αποστάσεως πρόσβαση στο δίκτυο της χρηματοοικονομικής οντότητας, για προνομιακή πρόσβαση, για πρόσβαση στους πόρους ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες ή πόρους ΤΠΕ που είναι προσβάσιμοι από το κοινό·

ζ) 

μέτρα για δικλείδες ασφαλείας φυσικής πρόσβασης που περιλαμβάνουν:

i) 

την ταυτοποίηση και καταγραφή των φυσικών προσώπων που είναι εξουσιοδοτημένα να έχουν πρόσβαση σε εγκαταστάσεις, κέντρα δεδομένων και ευαίσθητους οριοθετημένους χώρους που προσδιορίζει η χρηματοοικονομική οντότητα, όπου βρίσκονται πόροι ΤΠΕ και πληροφοριακοί πόροι·

ii) 

τη χορήγηση δικαιωμάτων φυσικής πρόσβασης σε κρίσιμους πόρους ΤΠΕ μόνο σε εξουσιοδοτημένα πρόσωπα, σύμφωνα με τις αρχές της ανάγκης γνώσης και των ελάχιστων προνομίων, και σε ad hoc βάση·

iii) 

την παρακολούθηση της φυσικής πρόσβασης σε εγκαταστάσεις, κέντρα δεδομένων και ευαίσθητους οριοθετημένους χώρους που προσδιορίζει η χρηματοοικονομική οντότητα, όπου βρίσκονται πόροι ΤΠΕ και πληροφοριακοί πόροι·

iv) 

την επανεξέταση των δικαιωμάτων φυσικής πρόσβασης προκειμένου να διασφαλιστεί η άμεση ανάκληση περιττών δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ε) σημείο i), οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες καθορίζουν την περίοδο διατήρησης, λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τους επιχειρηματικούς στόχους και τους στόχους ασφάλειας των πληροφοριών, τους λόγους καταχώρισης του συμβάντος στα αρχεία καταγραφής και τα αποτελέσματα της αξιολόγησης κινδύνων ΤΠΕ.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ε) σημείο ii), οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες χρησιμοποιούν, όπου είναι δυνατόν, ειδικούς λογαριασμούς για την εκτέλεση διοικητικών καθηκόντων στα συστήματα ΤΠΕ. Όπου είναι εφικτό και σκόπιμο, οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες εφαρμόζουν αυτοματοποιημένες λύσεις για τη διαχείριση προνομιακής πρόσβασης.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ζ) σημείο i), η ταυτοποίηση και η καταγραφή είναι ανάλογες προς τη σημασία των εγκαταστάσεων, των κέντρων δεδομένων, των ευαίσθητων οριοθετημένων χώρων και με την κρισιμότητα των λειτουργιών ή των συστημάτων ΤΠΕ που βρίσκονται εκεί.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ζ) σημείο iii), η παρακολούθηση είναι ανάλογη με την ταξινόμηση που καθορίζεται σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 8 παράγραφος 1 του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) 2022/2554 και την κρισιμότητα του χώρου στον οποίο πραγματοποιείται πρόσβαση.

EULAW Άρθρο 21 Έλεγχος πρόσβασης

Άρθρο 21

Έλεγχος πρόσβασης

Στο πλαίσιο του ελέγχου της διαχείρισης δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης, οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες αναπτύσσουν, τεκμηριώνουν και εφαρμόζουν πολιτική που περιλαμβάνει όλα τα ακόλουθα:

α) 

την εκχώρηση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης σε πόρους ΤΠΕ με βάση τις αρχές της ανάγκης γνώσης, της ανάγκης χρήσης και των ελάχιστων προνομίων, μεταξύ άλλων για την εξ αποστάσεως πρόσβαση και την πρόσβαση έκτακτης ανάγκης·

β) 

τον διαχωρισμό των καθηκόντων που έχουν σχεδιαστεί για την πρόληψη της αδικαιολόγητης πρόσβασης σε κρίσιμα δεδομένα ή για την αποτροπή της κατανομής συνδυασμών δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης που ενδέχεται να χρησιμοποιηθούν για την παράκαμψη ελέγχων·

γ) 

διάταξη σχετικά με τη λογοδοσία χρήστη, περιορίζοντας στο μέτρο του δυνατού τη χρήση γενικών και κοινών λογαριασμών χρήστη και διασφαλίζοντας ότι ανά πάσα στιγμή μπορεί να εξακριβωθεί η ταυτότητα των χρηστών σε σχέση με τις ενέργειες που εκτελούνται στα συστήματα ΤΠΕ·

δ) 

διάταξη σχετικά με τους περιορισμούς της πρόσβασης σε πόρους ΤΠΕ, καθορίζοντας δικλείδες ασφαλείας και εργαλεία για την πρόληψη της μη εξουσιοδοτημένης πρόσβασης·

ε) 

διαδικασίες διαχείρισης λογαριασμών για τη χορήγηση, την αλλαγή ή την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης για λογαριασμούς χρήστη και γενικούς λογαριασμούς, μεταξύ άλλων γενικούς λογαριασμούς διαχειριστή, συμπεριλαμβανομένης διάταξης για όλα τα ακόλουθα:

i) 

την ανάθεση ρόλων και αρμοδιοτήτων για τη χορήγηση, την επανεξέταση και την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης·

ii) 

την εκχώρηση προνομιακής πρόσβασης, πρόσβασης έκτακτης ανάγκης και διαχειριστή με βάση την ανάγκη χρήσης ή ad hoc για όλα τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ·

iii) 

την ανάκληση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης χωρίς αδικαιολόγητη καθυστέρηση μετά τη λήξη της απασχόλησης ή όταν η πρόσβαση δεν είναι πλέον απαραίτητη·

iv) 

την επικαιροποίηση δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης όταν απαιτούνται αλλαγές και τουλάχιστον μία φορά ετησίως για όλα τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ, εκτός από τα συστήματα ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες και τουλάχιστον κάθε 6 μήνες για συστήματα ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες·

στ) 

μεθόδους επαλήθευσης ταυτότητας, συμπεριλαμβανομένων όλων των ακόλουθων στοιχείων:

i) 

της χρήσης μεθόδων επαλήθευσης ταυτότητας ανάλογων με την ταξινόμηση που καθορίζεται σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 8 παράγραφος 1 του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) 2022/2554 και με το συνολικό προφίλ κινδύνου των πόρων ΤΠΕ και με συνεκτίμηση κορυφαίων πρακτικών·

ii) 

της χρήσης μεθόδων ισχυρής αυθεντικοποίησης σύμφωνα με κορυφαίες πρακτικές και τεχνικές για την εξ αποστάσεως πρόσβαση στο δίκτυο της χρηματοοικονομικής οντότητας, για προνομιακή πρόσβαση, για πρόσβαση στους πόρους ΤΠΕ που υποστηρίζουν κρίσιμες ή σημαντικές λειτουργίες ή πόρους ΤΠΕ που είναι προσβάσιμοι από το κοινό·

ζ) 

μέτρα για δικλείδες ασφαλείας φυσικής πρόσβασης που περιλαμβάνουν:

i) 

την ταυτοποίηση και καταγραφή των φυσικών προσώπων που είναι εξουσιοδοτημένα να έχουν πρόσβαση σε εγκαταστάσεις, κέντρα δεδομένων και ευαίσθητους οριοθετημένους χώρους που προσδιορίζει η χρηματοοικονομική οντότητα, όπου βρίσκονται πόροι ΤΠΕ και πληροφοριακοί πόροι·

ii) 

τη χορήγηση δικαιωμάτων φυσικής πρόσβασης σε κρίσιμους πόρους ΤΠΕ μόνο σε εξουσιοδοτημένα πρόσωπα, σύμφωνα με τις αρχές της ανάγκης γνώσης και των ελάχιστων προνομίων, και σε ad hoc βάση·

iii) 

την παρακολούθηση της φυσικής πρόσβασης σε εγκαταστάσεις, κέντρα δεδομένων και ευαίσθητους οριοθετημένους χώρους που προσδιορίζει η χρηματοοικονομική οντότητα, όπου βρίσκονται πόροι ΤΠΕ και πληροφοριακοί πόροι·

iv) 

την επανεξέταση των δικαιωμάτων φυσικής πρόσβασης προκειμένου να διασφαλιστεί η άμεση ανάκληση περιττών δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ε) σημείο i), οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες καθορίζουν την περίοδο διατήρησης, λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τους επιχειρηματικούς στόχους και τους στόχους ασφάλειας των πληροφοριών, τους λόγους καταχώρισης του συμβάντος στα αρχεία καταγραφής και τα αποτελέσματα της αξιολόγησης κινδύνων ΤΠΕ.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ε) σημείο ii), οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες χρησιμοποιούν, όπου είναι δυνατόν, ειδικούς λογαριασμούς για την εκτέλεση διοικητικών καθηκόντων στα συστήματα ΤΠΕ. Όπου είναι εφικτό και σκόπιμο, οι χρηματοοικονομικές οντότητες εφαρμόζουν αυτοματοποιημένες λύσεις για τη διαχείριση προνομιακής πρόσβασης.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ζ) σημείο i), η ταυτοποίηση και η καταγραφή είναι ανάλογες προς τη σημασία των εγκαταστάσεων, των κέντρων δεδομένων, των ευαίσθητων οριοθετημένων χώρων και με την κρισιμότητα των λειτουργιών ή των συστημάτων ΤΠΕ που βρίσκονται εκεί.

Για τους σκοπούς του στοιχείου ζ) σημείο iii), η παρακολούθηση είναι ανάλογη με την ταξινόμηση που καθορίζεται σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 8 παράγραφος 1 του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) 2022/2554 και την κρισιμότητα του χώρου στον οποίο πραγματοποιείται πρόσβαση.

Συνδεδεμένα ζητήματα

Συνδέσεις
Τύπος σύνδεσης Ζήτημα
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Technology
is related to Protect
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks Revenue Loss
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Loss of Competitive Advantage
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Internal Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of internal controls
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Harm from Illegal, Abusive or Unsafe Content / Conduct
blocks Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
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 Data from Cloud Storage
blocks Transfer Data to Cloud Account
blocks Unsecured Credentials
blocks Cloud Instance Metadata API
blocks Data from Configuration Repository
blocks SNMP (MIB Dump)
blocks Network Device Configuration Dump
blocks Multi-Factor Authentication Request Generation
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Fraud / Theft / Direct Financial Loss
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
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 Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Fraud / Theft / Direct Financial Loss
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
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 Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
is blocked by IAC-04 User Provisioning & De-Provisioning – Assessment Procedure
blocks IA-12(04) In-person Validation and Verification
blocks IA-12(04) [H] In-person Validation and Verification
blocks 03.01.01 Account Management
blocks 03.05.05 Identifier Management
blocks 03.09.02 Personnel Termination and Transfer
  • 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.