+Wireless Access Authentication & Encryption

Wireless Access Authentication & Encryption

Description

Mechanisms exist to protect the confidentiality and integrity of wireless networking technologies by implementing authentication and strong encryption.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Wi-Fi Protected Access 3 (WPA3)

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

∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Wi-Fi Protected Access 3 (WPA3)

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

∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Wi-Fi Protected Access 3 (WPA3)

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

∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Wi-Fi Protected Access 3 (WPA3)

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

∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Wi-Fi Protected Access 3 (WPA3)

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

Cryptographic Protections (CRY) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CRY domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Cryptography management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel provide an encryption solution (software or hardware) for the storage of sensitive/regulated data.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Cryptographic Protections (CRY) 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 CRY domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CRY 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 CRY domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Cryptographic management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Cryptographic management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that store, process or transmit sensitive/regulated data use cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure of information as an alternate to physical safeguards.
▪ External compliance requirements for cryptography are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to implement cryptographic mechanisms that are applicability for statutory, regulatory and/or contractual compliance obligations.

Level 3 Well Defined

Configuration Management (CFG) 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 CFG 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 CFG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A configuration management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CFG domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of configuration management operations (e.g., Configuration Management Database (CMBD) Asset 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 CFG domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to protect the confidentiality and integrity of wireless networking technologies by implementing authentication and strong encryption.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Cryptographic Protections (CRY) 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. Overview

1.1 References

1.2 Identified Requirements

1.3 Related Regulations

2. Identified Requirements

Requirements

3. Related Regulations

Regulations
EULAW Article 13 Network security management

Article 13

Network security management

Financial entities shall, as part of the safeguards ensuring the security of networks against intrusions and data misuse, develop, document, and implement policies, procedures, protocols, and tools on network security management, including all of the following:

(a) 

the segregation and segmentation of ICT systems and networks taking into account:

(i) 

the criticality or importance of the function those ICT systems and networks support;

(ii) 

the classification established in accordance with Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2554;

(iii) 

the overall risk profile of ICT assets using those ICT systems and networks;

(b) 

the documentation of all of the financial entity’s network connections and data flows;

(c) 

the use of a separate and dedicated network for the administration of ICT assets;

(d) 

the identification and implementation of network access controls to prevent and detect connections to the financial entity’s network by any unauthorised device or system, or any endpoint not meeting the financial entity’s security requirements;

(e) 

the encryption of network connections passing over corporate networks, public networks, domestic networks, third-party networks, and wireless networks, for communication protocols used, taking into account the results of the approved data classification, the results of the ICT risk assessment and the encryption of network connections referred to in Article 6(2);

(f) 

the design of networks in line with the ICT security requirements established by the financial entity, taking into account leading practices to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the network;

(g) 

the securing of network traffic between the internal networks and the internet and other external connections;

(h) 

the identification of the roles and responsibilities and steps for the specification, implementation, approval, change, and review of firewall rules and connections filters;

(i) 

the performance of reviews of the network architecture and of the network security design once a year, and periodically for microenterprises, to identify potential vulnerabilities;

(j) 

the measures to temporarily isolate, where necessary, subnetworks, and network components and devices;

(k) 

the implementation of a secure configuration baseline of all network components, and the hardening of the network and of network devices in line with any vendor instructions, where applicable standards, as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012, and leading practices;

(l) 

the procedures to limit, lock, and terminate system and remote sessions after a specified period of inactivity;

(m) 

for network services agreements:

(i) 

the identification and specification of ICT and information security measures, service levels, and management requirements of all network services;

(ii) 

whether those services are provided by an ICT intra-group service provider or by ICT third-party service providers.

For the purposes of point (h), financial entities shall perform the review of firewall rules and connections filters on a regular basis in accordance with the classification established in accordance with Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 and the overall risk profile of ICT systems involved. For ICT systems that support critical or important functions, financial entities shall verify the adequacy of the existing firewall rules and connection filters at least every 6 months.

Linked Issues

Issuelinks
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 Unauthorized Access
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Long-Term Confidentiality Loss from Cryptographic Obsolescence
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
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 Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Products
blocks Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks Harvest Now / Decrypt Later (HNDL)
blocks Cryptographic Compromise / Cryptanalytic Capability Advancement
blocks COS-02.01B
is blocked by CFG-04.8 Wireless Access Authentication & Encryption – Assessment Procedure
blocks AC-18 Wireless Access
blocks SC-40 Wireless Link Protection
blocks AC-18 [L] Wireless Access
blocks AC-18 [M] Wireless Access
blocks AC-18 [H] Wireless Access
blocks 03.01.16 Wireless Access
  • 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.