+Third-Party Contract Requirements
---+Contract Flow-Down Requirements
---+Provider Contingency Plan
|
Third-Party Contract Requirements
Description
Mechanisms exist to require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls ∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls ∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls ∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls ∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls ∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
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
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative. ▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.
Level 3 Well Defined
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its TAASD.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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. Resumen
| Título |
Estándar |
|
Contract Flow-Down Requirements
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable subcontractors and suppliers.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) ∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
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
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative. ▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.
Level 3 Well Defined
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable sub-contractors and suppliers.
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.
|
|
Provider Contingency Plan
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
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
Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) 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 BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD 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 BCD domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery (BC/DR)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ BC/DR may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
Level 3 Well Defined
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.
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.
|
1.1 Referencias
1.2 Requisitos identificados
1.3 Regulaciones relacionadas
2. Requisitos identificados
Requisitos
| Fuente |
Requisito |
3. Regulaciones relacionadas
Regulaciones
| Fuente |
Regulación |
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 11 Seguridad de los datos y sistemas
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 13 Gestión de la seguridad de las redes
Artículo 13
Gestión de la seguridad de las redes
Dentro de las salvaguardias que garanticen la seguridad de las redes contra las intrusiones y el uso indebido de los datos, las entidades financieras elaborarán, documentarán y aplicarán políticas, procedimientos, protocolos y herramientas en materia de gestión de la seguridad de las redes que incluirán todos los aspectos siguientes:
a)
la separación y segmentación de los sistemas y redes de TIC teniendo en cuenta:
i)
el carácter esencial o la importancia de la función sustentada por dichos sistemas y redes de TIC,
ii)
la clasificación establecida de conformidad con el artículo 8, apartado 1, del Reglamento (UE) 2022/2554,
iii)
el perfil de riesgo general de los activos de TIC que utilicen dichos sistemas y redes de TIC;
b)
la documentación de todas las conexiones de red y flujos de datos de la entidad financiera;
c)
el uso de una red separada y específica para la administración de los activos de TIC;
d)
la determinación y aplicación de controles de acceso a las redes para prevenir y detectar las conexiones a la red de la entidad financiera mediante cualquier dispositivo o sistema no autorizado o cualquier nodo final que no cumpla los requisitos de seguridad de la entidad financiera;
e)
el cifrado de las conexiones de red que pasen por redes corporativas, redes públicas, redes domésticas, redes de terceros y redes inalámbricas, en lo referente a los protocolos de comunicación utilizados, teniendo en cuenta los resultados de la clasificación de datos aprobada, los resultados de la evaluación del riesgo relacionado con las TIC y el cifrado de las conexiones de red a que se refiere el artículo 6, apartado 2;
f)
el diseño de las redes en consonancia con los requisitos de seguridad de las TIC establecidos por la entidad financiera, teniendo en cuenta las prácticas punteras para garantizar la confidencialidad, integridad y disponibilidad de las redes;
g)
la protección del tráfico de red entre las redes internas e internet y otras conexiones externas;
h)
la determinación de las funciones y responsabilidades y de las etapas para la especificación, aplicación, aprobación, modificación y revisión de las reglas cortafuegos y los filtros de conexión;
i)
la revisión de la arquitectura de las redes y del diseño de la seguridad de las redes una vez al año, y periódicamente en el caso de las microempresas, con el fin de detectar posibles vulnerabilidades;
j)
las medidas para aislar temporalmente, en caso necesario, las subredes y los componentes y dispositivos de red;
k)
la aplicación de una configuración segura de referencia de todos los componentes de las redes y el endurecimiento de las redes y de los dispositivos de red en consonancia con las instrucciones de los proveedores, las normas definidas en el artículo 2, punto 1, del Reglamento (UE) n.o 1025/2012, en su caso, y las prácticas punteras;
l)
los procedimientos para limitar, bloquear y cerrar las sesiones de sistema y a distancia tras un período de inactividad especificado;
m)
respecto de los acuerdos de servicios de red:
i)
la determinación y especificación de las medidas de seguridad de las TIC y de la información, los niveles de servicio y los requisitos de gestión de todos los servicios de red,
ii)
la especificación de si dichos servicios son prestados por un proveedor intragrupo o por proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC.
A efectos de la letra h), las entidades financieras revisarán periódicamente las reglas cortafuegos y los filtros de conexión teniendo en cuenta la clasificación establecida de conformidad con el artículo 8, apartado 1, del Reglamento (UE) 2022/2554 y el perfil de riesgo general de los sistemas de TIC que intervengan. En el caso de los sistemas de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes, las entidades financieras verificarán la adecuación de las reglas cortafuegos y los filtros de conexión vigentes al menos cada seis meses.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 28 Principios generales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 29 Evaluación preliminar del riesgo de concentración de TIC a nivel de la entidad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 Cláusulas contractuales fundamentales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 21 Medidas para la gestión de riesgos de ciberseguridad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 28 Principios generales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 29 Evaluación preliminar del riesgo de concentración de TIC a nivel de la entidad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 Cláusulas contractuales fundamentales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 21 Medidas para la gestión de riesgos de ciberseguridad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 28 Principios generales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 29 Evaluación preliminar del riesgo de concentración de TIC a nivel de la entidad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 Cláusulas contractuales fundamentales
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 21 Medidas para la gestión de riesgos de ciberseguridad
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 28 1
1. Las entidades financieras gestionarán el riesgo relacionado con las TIC derivado de terceros como un elemento integrante del riesgo relacionado con las TIC dentro de su marco de gestión del riesgo relacionado con las TIC a que se refiere el artículo 6, apartado 1, y de conformidad con los principios siguientes:
|
a)
|
las entidades financieras que tengan acuerdos contractuales en vigor para utilizar servicios de TIC en el funcionamiento de sus operaciones comerciales serán, en todo momento, plenamente responsables del cumplimiento y observancia de todas las obligaciones con arreglo al presente Reglamento y al Derecho aplicable en materia de servicios financieros;
|
|
b)
|
las entidades financieras gestionarán el riesgo relacionado con las TIC derivado de terceros con arreglo al principio de proporcionalidad, teniendo en cuenta:
|
i)
|
la naturaleza, la escala, la complejidad y la importancia de las dependencias con respecto a las TIC,
|
|
ii)
|
los riesgos derivados de los acuerdos contractuales sobre el uso de servicios de TIC celebrados con proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC, teniendo en cuenta el carácter esencial o la importancia del servicio, el proceso o la función de que se trate, y la repercusión potencial en la continuidad y la disponibilidad de las actividades y los servicios financieros, a escala particular y de grupo.
|
|
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 29 2
2. Cuando el acuerdo contractual sobre el uso de servicios de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes incluya la posibilidad de que un proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC subcontrate a su vez servicios de TIC que sustenten una función esencial o importante a otros proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC, las entidades financieras ponderarán los beneficios y los riesgos que puedan derivarse de esa posible subcontratación, en particular cuando se trate de un subcontratista de TIC establecido en un tercer país.
Cuando el acuerdo contractual afecte a servicios de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes, las entidades financieras ponderarán debidamente las disposiciones legislativas en materia de insolvencia que se aplicarían en caso de quiebra del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC, así como cualquier restricción que pueda surgir y que afecte a la recuperación urgente de los datos de la entidad financiera.
Cuando se celebren acuerdos contractuales sobre el uso de servicios de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes con un proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC establecido en un tercer país, las entidades financieras tendrán en consideración, además de lo mencionado el párrafo segundo, el cumplimiento de la normativa en materia de protección de datos de la Unión y la aplicación efectiva del Derecho en ese tercer país.
Cuando el acuerdo contractual sobre el uso de servicios de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes contemple la subcontratación, las entidades financieras evaluarán si las cadenas de subcontratación potencialmente largas o complejas pueden afectar a su capacidad para efectuar un seguimiento completo de las funciones contratadas y a la capacidad de la autoridad competente para supervisar efectivamente a la entidad financiera a este respecto, y de qué manera.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 1
1. Los derechos y obligaciones de la entidad financiera y del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC estarán claramente asignados y establecidos por escrito. El contrato completo incluirá los acuerdos de nivel de servicio y se formalizará en un documento escrito que estará a disposición de las partes en papel, o en un documento en otro formato descargable, duradero y accesible.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 2
2. Los acuerdos contractuales sobre el uso de servicios de TIC incluirán, como mínimo, los elementos siguientes:
|
a)
|
una descripción clara y completa de todas las funciones y los servicios de TIC que deba prestar el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC en la que se indique si está permitida la subcontratación de un servicio de TIC que sustente una función esencial o importante, o partes sustanciales de ellas, y, en caso afirmativo, las condiciones aplicables a dicha subcontratación;
|
|
b)
|
los lugares, en concreto, las regiones o países, en los que deberán proporcionarse las funciones y los servicios de TIC contratados o subcontratados y en los que deberán tratarse los datos, incluido el lugar de almacenamiento, y el requisito de que el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC notifique por adelantado a la entidad financiera cualquier cambio previsto de dichos lugares;
|
|
c)
|
disposiciones sobre disponibilidad, autenticidad, integridad y confidencialidad en relación con la protección de los datos, incluidos los datos personales;
|
|
d)
|
disposiciones sobre las garantías de la entidad financiera de poder acceder a los datos personales y no personales tratados y de poder recuperarlos y que le sean devueltos en un formato fácilmente accesible en caso de insolvencia, resolución o interrupción de las operaciones comerciales del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC o en caso de terminación de los acuerdos contractuales;
|
|
e)
|
descripciones del nivel de servicio, incluidas sus actualizaciones y revisiones;
|
|
f)
|
la obligación del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC de prestar asistencia a la entidad financiera sin coste adicional, o a un coste determinado con anterioridad, cuando se produzca un incidente de TIC relacionado con el servicio de TIC prestado a la entidad financiera;
|
|
g)
|
la obligación del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC de cooperar plenamente con las autoridades competentes y las autoridades de resolución de la entidad financiera, incluidas las personas nombradas por ellas;
|
|
h)
|
los derechos de terminación y los correspondientes plazos mínimos de notificación para la terminación de los acuerdos contractuales, conforme a las expectativas de las autoridades competentes y las autoridades de resolución;
|
|
i)
|
las condiciones para la participación de proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC en los programas de sensibilización en materia de seguridad de las TIC y en las actividades de formación sobre resiliencia operativa digital de las entidades financieras, de conformidad con el artículo 13, apartado 6.
|
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 3
3. Además de los elementos a que se refiere el apartado 2, los acuerdos contractuales sobre el uso de servicios de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes incluirán por lo menos lo siguiente:
|
a)
|
descripciones completas del nivel de servicio, incluidas sus actualizaciones y revisiones, con objetivos precisos de rendimiento cuantitativos y cualitativos dentro de los niveles de servicio acordados, de modo que la entidad financiera pueda realizar un seguimiento efectivo de los servicios de TIC y que se puedan adoptar sin demora indebida las medidas correctoras adecuadas cuando no se alcancen los niveles de servicio acordados;
|
|
b)
|
plazos de notificación y obligaciones de información del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC a la entidad financiera, incluida la notificación de cualquier hecho que pueda afectar considerablemente a la capacidad del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC para prestar de forma efectiva los servicios de TIC que sustentan funciones esenciales o importantes de conformidad con los niveles de servicio acordados;
|
|
c)
|
requisitos para que el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC aplique y someta apruebe los planes de contingencia empresarial y disponga de medidas, herramientas y políticas de seguridad de las TIC que proporcionen un nivel adecuado de seguridad para la prestación de servicios por parte de la entidad financiera en consonancia con su marco regulador;
|
|
d)
|
la obligación de que el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC participe y coopere plenamente en las pruebas de penetración basadas en amenazas de la entidad financiera a que se refieren los artículos 26 y 27;
|
|
e)
|
el derecho a realizar un seguimiento continuo de la actuación del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC, lo que implica lo siguiente:
|
i)
|
derechos ilimitados de acceso, inspección y auditoría por la entidad financiera o un tercero designado, y por la autoridad competente, y el derecho a hacer copias de la documentación pertinente in situ si son esenciales para las operaciones del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC, cuyo ejercicio efectivo no se vea obstaculizado o limitado por otros acuerdos contractuales o políticas de aplicación,
|
|
ii)
|
el derecho a pactar niveles de garantía alternativos si se ven afectados los derechos de otros clientes,
|
|
iii)
|
la obligación de que el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC coopere plenamente durante las inspecciones y las auditorías in situ realizadas por las autoridades competentes, el supervisor principal, la entidad financiera o un tercero designado, y
|
|
iv)
|
la obligación de proporcionar detalles sobre el alcance, los procedimientos que deben seguirse y la frecuencia de tales inspecciones y auditorías;
|
|
|
f)
|
estrategias de salida, en particular el establecimiento de un período transitorio suficiente obligatorio:
|
i)
|
durante el cual el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC seguirá proporcionando las funciones o los servicios de TIC de que se trate con el fin de reducir el riesgo de perturbación en la entidad financiera o de garantizar su resolución y reestructuración efectivas,
|
|
ii)
|
que permita a la entidad financiera migrar a otro proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC o adoptar soluciones internas coherentes con la complejidad del servicio prestado.
|
|
Como excepción a lo dispuesto en la letra e), el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC y la entidad financiera que sea una microempresa podrán acordar que se puedan delegar los derechos de acceso, inspección y auditoría de la entidad financiera en un tercero independiente, designado por el proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC, y que la entidad financiera pueda solicitar al tercero en cualquier momento información y garantías sobre la actuación del proveedor tercero de servicios de TIC.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 30 4
4. Al negociar acuerdos contractuales, las entidades financieras y los proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC considerarán el uso de cláusulas contractuales tipo elaboradas por las autoridades públicas para servicios específicos.
|
Incidencias vinculadas
Vínculos
| Tipo de vínculo |
Incidencia |
|
is related to
|
Annual |
|
is related to
|
relative Control Weighting = 10 |
|
is related to
|
Process |
|
is related to
|
Identify |
|
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
|
Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data |
|
blocks
|
Business / Service Interruption |
|
blocks
|
Contractual Default / Termination |
|
blocks
|
Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives |
|
blocks
|
Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities |
|
blocks
|
Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Lack of oversight of third-party controls |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay |
|
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
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
Dysfunctional Management Practices |
|
blocks
|
Human Error |
|
blocks
|
Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change |
|
blocks
|
Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct |
|
blocks
|
Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct |
|
blocks
|
Economic Shock / Market Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
HR-06.02B |
|
blocks
|
PS-01.05B |
|
blocks
|
PS-06.04AC |
|
blocks
|
OPS-11.02B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06AS |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.02AC |
|
blocks
|
DEV-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.02AC |
|
blocks
|
SSO-03.02B |
|
blocks
|
SIM-04.02AC |
|
blocks
|
COM-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PSS-12.03B |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data |
|
blocks
|
Business / Service Interruption |
|
blocks
|
Contractual Default / Termination |
|
blocks
|
Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives |
|
blocks
|
Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities |
|
blocks
|
Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Lack of oversight of third-party controls |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay |
|
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
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
Dysfunctional Management Practices |
|
blocks
|
Human Error |
|
blocks
|
Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change |
|
blocks
|
Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct |
|
blocks
|
Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct |
|
blocks
|
Economic Shock / Market Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
HR-06.02B |
|
blocks
|
PS-01.05B |
|
blocks
|
PS-06.04AC |
|
blocks
|
OPS-11.02B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06AS |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.02AC |
|
blocks
|
DEV-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.02AC |
|
blocks
|
SSO-03.02B |
|
blocks
|
SIM-04.02AC |
|
blocks
|
COM-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PSS-12.03B |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data |
|
blocks
|
Business / Service Interruption |
|
blocks
|
Contractual Default / Termination |
|
blocks
|
Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives |
|
blocks
|
Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities |
|
blocks
|
Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure |
|
blocks
|
Lack of oversight of third-party controls |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay |
|
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
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
Dysfunctional Management Practices |
|
blocks
|
Human Error |
|
blocks
|
Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change |
|
blocks
|
Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct |
|
blocks
|
Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct |
|
blocks
|
Economic Shock / Market Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
HR-06.02B |
|
blocks
|
PS-01.05B |
|
blocks
|
PS-06.04AC |
|
blocks
|
OPS-11.02B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06B |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.06AS |
|
blocks
|
IAM-07.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PI-02.02AC |
|
blocks
|
DEV-02.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.02AC |
|
blocks
|
SSO-03.02B |
|
blocks
|
SIM-04.02AC |
|
blocks
|
COM-02.01AC |
|
blocks
|
PSS-12.03B |
|
is blocked by
|
TPM-14 Third-Party Contract Requirements – Assessment Procedure |
|
blocks
|
SR-03(03) Sub-tier Flow Down |
|
blocks
|
03.01.20 Use of External Systems |
|
blocks
|
03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel |
|
blocks
|
03.16.03 External System Services |
|
blocks
|
03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods |
|
blocks
|
03.17.03 Supply Chain Requirements and Processes |
|
blocks
|
GV.OC-02 Internal and external stakeholders are understood, and their needs and expectations regarding cybersecurity risk management are understood and … |
|
blocks
|
GV.OC-03 Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements regarding cybersecurity - including privacy and civil liberties obligations - are understood and … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-02 Cybersecurity roles and responsibilities for suppliers, customers, and partners are established, communicated, and coordinated internally and … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-05 Requirements to address cybersecurity risks in supply chains are established, prioritized, and integrated into contracts and other types of … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-06 Planning and due diligence are performed to reduce risks before entering into formal supplier or other third-party relationships |
|
blocks
|
PO.1 Define Security Requirements for Software Development |
- 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.
|