+Public Relations & Reputation Repair
|
Public Relations & Reputation Repair
Description
Mechanisms exist to proactively manage public relations associated with incidents and employ appropriate measures to prevent further reputational damage and develop plans to repair any damage to the organization's reputation.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Basic incident response plan
∙ Designate incident response contact
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Documented incident response plan
∙ Incident log
∙ Designated IR team
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal incident response program
∙ IR playbooks
∙ Tabletop exercises
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Enterprise incident response program
∙ 24/7 SOC monitoring
∙ SOAR platform
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise SOC with SIEM/SOAR (e.g., Splunk SOAR, Palo Alto XSOAR)
∙ IR retainer
∙ Threat hunting
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
Incident Response (IRO) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with IRO domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Incident response-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 use an informal process to facilitate incident management operations that cover preparation, detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Incident Response (IRO) 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 IRO domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with DCH 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 IRO domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Incident response-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards, procedures & guidelines).
▪ Incident response management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel operate an incident response capability using a documented and tested Incident Response Plan (IRP) to facilitate incident management operations that cover preparation, detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery.
Level 3 Well Defined
Incident Response (IRO) 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 IRO domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Cybersecurity personnel operate an incident response capability using a documented and tested Incident Response Plan (IRP) to facilitate incident management operations that cover preparation, detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery.
▪ An incident response team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain IRO domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of incident response operations (e.g., incident management software, etc.).
▪ 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 IRO 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 proactively manage public relations associated with incidents and employ appropriate measures to prevent further reputational damage and develop plans to repair any damage to the organization's reputation.
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.
1. Overview
1.1 References
1.2 Identified Requirements
1.3 Related Regulations
2. Identified Requirements
Requirements
| Source |
Requirement |
3. Related Regulations
Regulations
| Source |
Regulation |
|
EULAW
|
Article 23 Reporting obligations
Article 23
1.
Each Member State shall ensure that essential and important entities notify, without undue delay, its CSIRT or, where applicable, its competent authority in accordance with paragraph 4 of any incident that has a significant impact on the provision of their services as referred to in paragraph 3 (significant incident). Where appropriate, entities concerned shall notify, without undue delay, the recipients of their services of significant incidents that are likely to adversely affect the provision of those services. Each Member State shall ensure that those entities report, inter alia, any information enabling the CSIRT or, where applicable, the competent authority to determine any cross-border impact of the incident. The mere act of notification shall not subject the notifying entity to increased liability.
Where the entities concerned notify the competent authority of a significant incident under the first subparagraph, the Member State shall ensure that that competent authority forwards the notification to the CSIRT upon receipt.
In the case of a cross-border or cross-sectoral significant incident, Member States shall ensure that their single points of contact are provided in due time with relevant information notified in accordance with paragraph 4.
2.
Where applicable, Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities communicate, without undue delay, to the recipients of their services that are potentially affected by a significant cyber threat any measures or remedies that those recipients are able to take in response to that threat. Where appropriate, the entities shall also inform those recipients of the significant cyber threat itself.
3.
An incident shall be considered to be significant if:
(a)
it has caused or is capable of causing severe operational disruption of the services or financial loss for the entity concerned;
(b)
it has affected or is capable of affecting other natural or legal persons by causing considerable material or non-material damage.
4.
Member States shall ensure that, for the purpose of notification under paragraph 1, the entities concerned submit to the CSIRT or, where applicable, the competent authority:
(a)
without undue delay and in any event within 24 hours of becoming aware of the significant incident, an early warning, which, where applicable, shall indicate whether the significant incident is suspected of being caused by unlawful or malicious acts or could have a cross-border impact;
(b)
without undue delay and in any event within 72 hours of becoming aware of the significant incident, an incident notification, which, where applicable, shall update the information referred to in point (a) and indicate an initial assessment of the significant incident, including its severity and impact, as well as, where available, the indicators of compromise;
(c)
upon the request of a CSIRT or, where applicable, the competent authority, an intermediate report on relevant status updates;
(d)
a final report not later than one month after the submission of the incident notification under point (b), including the following:
(i)
a detailed description of the incident, including its severity and impact;
(ii)
the type of threat or root cause that is likely to have triggered the incident;
(iii)
applied and ongoing mitigation measures;
(iv)
where applicable, the cross-border impact of the incident;
(e)
in the event of an ongoing incident at the time of the submission of the final report referred to in point (d), Member States shall ensure that entities concerned provide a progress report at that time and a final report within one month of their handling of the incident.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, point (b), a trust service provider shall, with regard to significant incidents that have an impact on the provision of its trust services, notify the CSIRT or, where applicable, the competent authority, without undue delay and in any event within 24 hours of becoming aware of the significant incident.
5.
The CSIRT or the competent authority shall provide, without undue delay and where possible within 24 hours of receiving the early warning referred to in paragraph 4, point (a), a response to the notifying entity, including initial feedback on the significant incident and, upon request of the entity, guidance or operational advice on the implementation of possible mitigation measures. Where the CSIRT is not the initial recipient of the notification referred to in paragraph 1, the guidance shall be provided by the competent authority in cooperation with the CSIRT. The CSIRT shall provide additional technical support if the entity concerned so requests. Where the significant incident is suspected to be of criminal nature, the CSIRT or the competent authority shall also provide guidance on reporting the significant incident to law enforcement authorities.
6.
Where appropriate, and in particular where the significant incident concerns two or more Member States, the CSIRT, the competent authority or the single point of contact shall inform, without undue delay, the other affected Member States and ENISA of the significant incident. Such information shall include the type of information received in accordance with paragraph 4. In so doing, the CSIRT, the competent authority or the single point of contact shall, in accordance with Union or national law, preserve the entity’s security and commercial interests as well as the confidentiality of the information provided.
7.
Where public awareness is necessary to prevent a significant incident or to deal with an ongoing significant incident, or where disclosure of the significant incident is otherwise in the public interest, a Member State’s CSIRT or, where applicable, its competent authority, and, where appropriate, the CSIRTs or the competent authorities of other Member States concerned, may, after consulting the entity concerned, inform the public about the significant incident or require the entity to do so.
8.
At the request of the CSIRT or the competent authority, the single point of contact shall forward notifications received pursuant to paragraph 1 to the single points of contact of other affected Member States.
9.
The single point of contact shall submit to ENISA every three months a summary report, including anonymised and aggregated data on significant incidents, incidents, cyber threats and near misses notified in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article and with Article 30. In order to contribute to the provision of comparable information, ENISA may adopt technical guidance on the parameters of the information to be included in the summary report. ENISA shall inform the Cooperation Group and the CSIRTs network about its findings on notifications received every six months.
10.
The CSIRTs or, where applicable, the competent authorities shall provide to the competent authorities under Directive (EU) 2022/2557 information about significant incidents, incidents, cyber threats and near misses notified in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article and with Article 30 by entities identified as critical entities under Directive (EU) 2022/2557.
11.
The Commission may adopt implementing acts further specifying the type of information, the format and the procedure of a notification submitted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article and to Article 30 and of a communication submitted pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article.
By 17 October 2024, the Commission shall, with regard to DNS service providers, TLD name registries, cloud computing service providers, data centre service providers, content delivery network providers, managed service providers, managed security service providers, as well as providers of online marketplaces, of online search engines and of social networking services platforms, adopt implementing acts further specifying the cases in which an incident shall be considered to be significant as referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission may adopt such implementing acts with regard to other essential and important entities.
The Commission shall exchange advice and cooperate with the Cooperation Group on the draft implementing acts referred to in the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph in accordance with Article 14(4), point (e).
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 39(2).
|
Linked Issues
- 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.
|