+Defined Roles & Responsibilities
---+Assigned Roles & Responsibilities Awareness
|
Defined Roles & Responsibilities
Description
Mechanisms exist to define cybersecurity roles & responsibilities for all personnel.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment ∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment ∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment ∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment ∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment ∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix
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
Human Resources Security (HRS) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with HRS domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Personnel management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ The Human Resources (HR) department provides guidance on secure HR practices for hiring, retaining and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization. ▪ Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/or data protection are not consistent and/or standardized.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization. ▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.
Level 3 Well Defined
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software 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 HRS 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 define cybersecurity roles & responsibilities for all personnel.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 |
|
Assigned Roles & Responsibilities Awareness
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to communicate with users about their roles and responsibilities to maintain a safe and secure working environment.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Formal onboarding training ∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Formal onboarding training ∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal onboarding training ∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Formal onboarding training ∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Formal onboarding training ∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)
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
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization. ▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.
Level 3 Well Defined
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software 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 HRS 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 communicate with users about their roles and responsibilities to maintain a safe and secure working environment.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 Referencias
1.2 Requisitos identificados
1.3 Regulaciones relacionadas
2. Requisitos identificados
Requisitos
| Fuente |
Requisito |
3. Regulaciones relacionadas
Regulaciones
| Fuente |
Regulación |
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 2 Elementos generales de las políticas, procedimientos, protocolos y herramientas en materia de seguridad de las TIC
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 15 Gestión de proyectos de TIC
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 17 Gestión de cambios en las TIC
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 19 Política de recursos humanos
Artículo 19
Política de recursos humanos
Las entidades financieras incluirán en su política de recursos humanos u otras políticas pertinentes todos los elementos relacionados con la seguridad de las TIC que se indican a continuación:
a)
la determinación y asignación de toda responsabilidad específica en materia de seguridad de las TIC;
b)
los requisitos de que el personal de la entidad financiera y de los proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC que utilice activos de TIC de la entidad financiera o acceda a ellos:
i)
esté informado de las políticas, procedimientos y protocolos en materia de seguridad de las TIC de la entidad financiera y se adhiera a ellos,
ii)
conozca los canales de denuncia establecidos por la entidad financiera para la detección de comportamientos anómalos, incluidos, en su caso, los canales de denuncia establecidos de conformidad con la Directiva (UE) 2019/1937 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (
1
),
iii)
restituya a la entidad financiera, al término de su relación laboral, todos los activos de TIC y los activos de información tangibles que obren en su poder y pertenezcan a la entidad financiera.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 21 Control de acceso
Artículo 21
Dentro de su control de los derechos de gestión de accesos, las entidades financieras elaborarán, documentarán y aplicarán una política que incluya todos los aspectos siguientes:
a)
la asignación de derechos de acceso a los activos de TIC sobre la base de los principios de «necesidad de conocer», «necesidad de uso» y «mínimo privilegio», también para el acceso a distancia y de emergencia;
b)
la separación de funciones con el fin de impedir el acceso injustificado a datos esenciales o la asignación de combinaciones de derechos de acceso que puedan utilizarse para eludir los controles;
c)
una disposición sobre responsabilidad de los usuarios que limite en la medida de lo posible el uso de cuentas de usuario genéricas y compartidas y garantice que, en todo momento, los usuarios sean identificables cuando realicen acciones en los sistemas de TIC;
d)
una disposición sobre las restricciones de acceso a los activos de TIC que establezca controles y herramientas para impedir el acceso no autorizado;
e)
procedimientos de gestión de cuentas para la concesión, modificación o revocación de derechos de acceso en relación con las cuentas de usuario y las cuentas genéricas, incluidas las cuentas de administrador genéricas, que incluyan disposiciones sobre todos los aspectos siguientes:
i)
asignación de funciones y responsabilidades para la concesión, revisión y revocación de los derechos de acceso,
ii)
asignación de acceso privilegiado, de emergencia y de administrador sobre la base del principio de «necesidad de uso» o con carácter ad hoc para todos los sistemas de TIC,
iii)
retirada de los derechos de acceso sin demora indebida al término de la relación laboral o cuando el acceso ya no sea necesario,
iv)
actualización de los derechos de acceso cuando se requiera introducir cambios y al menos una vez al año para todos los sistemas de TIC que no sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes y al menos cada seis meses para los sistemas de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes;
f)
métodos de autenticación, incluidos todos los aspectos siguientes:
i)
el uso de métodos de autenticación que sean acordes con la clasificación establecida de conformidad con el artículo 8, apartado 1, del Reglamento (UE) 2022/2554 y con el perfil de riesgo general de los activos de TIC, y que tengan en cuenta las prácticas punteras,
ii)
el uso de métodos de autenticación sólidos de conformidad con las prácticas y técnicas punteras para el acceso a distancia a la red de la entidad financiera, el acceso privilegiado y el acceso a los activos de TIC que sustenten funciones esenciales o importantes o a los activos de TIC que sean de acceso público;
g)
medidas de control del acceso físico que incluyan lo siguiente:
i)
la identificación y el registro de las personas físicas autorizadas a acceder a los locales, los centros de datos y las zonas sensibles designadas determinadas por la entidad financiera en los que se encuentren los activos de TIC y de información,
ii)
la concesión de derechos de acceso físico a los activos de TIC esenciales únicamente a las personas autorizadas, de conformidad con los principios de «necesidad de conocer» y «mínimo privilegio» y con carácter ad hoc,
iii)
el seguimiento del acceso físico a los locales, los centros de datos y las zonas sensibles designadas determinadas por la entidad financiera en los que se encuentren los activos de TIC, los activos de información o ambos,
iv)
la revisión de los derechos de acceso físico para garantizar la rápida revocación de los derechos que no sean necesarios.
A efectos de la letra e), inciso i), las entidades financieras establecerán el período de conservación teniendo en cuenta los objetivos empresariales y de seguridad de la información, los motivos por los que se consigna el hecho de que se trate en los registros y los resultados de la evaluación del riesgo relacionado con las TIC.
A efectos de la letra e), inciso ii), las entidades financieras utilizarán, en la medida de lo posible, cuentas específicas para la realización de tareas administrativas en los sistemas de TIC. Cuando sea factible y adecuado, las entidades financieras implementarán soluciones automatizadas para la gestión del acceso privilegiado.
A efectos de la letra g), inciso i), la identificación y el registro serán acordes con la importancia de los locales, los centros de datos y las zonas sensibles designadas y con el carácter esencial de las operaciones que se realicen en ellos o los sistemas de TIC que se encuentren en ellos.
A efectos de la letra g), inciso iii), el seguimiento será acorde con la clasificación establecida de conformidad con el artículo 8, apartado 1, del Reglamento (UE) 2022/2554 y con el carácter esencial de la zona a la que se acceda.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 23 Detección de actividades anómalas y criterios para detectar y responder a incidentes relacionados con las TIC
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 28 Gobernanza y organización
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 5 Gobernanza y organización
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 32 Seguridad del tratamiento
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artículo 5 2
2. El órgano de dirección de la entidad financiera definirá, aprobará y supervisará todas las disposiciones relacionadas con el marco de gestión del riesgo relacionado con las TIC a que se refiere el artículo 6, apartado 1, y será responsable de su aplicación.
A efectos del párrafo primero, el órgano de dirección:
|
a)
|
asumirá la responsabilidad última de gestionar el riesgo relacionado con las TIC de la entidad financiera;
|
|
b)
|
adoptará políticas encaminadas a garantizar el mantenimiento de unos niveles elevados de disponibilidad, autenticidad, integridad y confidencialidad de los datos;
|
|
c)
|
definirá claramente los cometidos y responsabilidades por lo que respecta a todas las funciones relacionadas con las TIC y establecerá mecanismos de gobernanza adecuados para garantizar una comunicación, cooperación y coordinación efectivas y oportunas entre dichas funciones;
|
|
d)
|
asumirá la responsabilidad general de establecer y aprobar la estrategia de resiliencia operativa digital a que se refiere el artículo 6, apartado 8, lo que incluye determinar el nivel adecuado de tolerancia al riesgo relacionado con las TIC de la entidad financiera a que se refiere el artículo 6, apartado 8, letra b);
|
|
e)
|
aprobará, supervisará y revisará periódicamente la aplicación de la política de continuidad de la actividad en materia de TIC y de los planes de respuesta y recuperación en materia de TIC de la entidad financiera a que se refiere, respectivamente, el artículo 11 apartados 1 y 3, que podrán ser adoptados como una política específica que forme parte integrante de la política global de continuidad de la actividad y del plan de respuesta y recuperación de la entidad financiera;
|
|
f)
|
aprobará y revisará periódicamente los planes de auditoría internos de TIC y las auditorías de TIC de la entidad financiera, así como sus modificaciones significativas;
|
|
g)
|
asignará y revisará periódicamente el presupuesto adecuado para satisfacer las necesidades de resiliencia operativa digital de la entidad financiera con respecto a todos los tipos de recursos, incluidos los programas de sensibilización en materia de seguridad de las TIC y las actividades de formación sobre resiliencia operativa digital pertinentes a que se refiere el artículo 13, apartado 6, y las capacidades en materia de TIC para todo el personal;
|
|
h)
|
aprobará y revisará periódicamente la política de la entidad financiera sobre los acuerdos relativos al uso de servicios de TIC prestados por proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC;
|
|
i)
|
establecerá, a escala corporativa, canales de comunicación que le permitan estar debidamente informado de lo siguiente:
|
i)
|
de los acuerdos celebrados con proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC sobre el uso de servicios de TIC,
|
|
ii)
|
de cualquier cambio sustancial pertinente previsto en relación con los proveedores terceros de servicios de TIC,
|
|
iii)
|
de las posibles repercusiones de tales cambios en las funciones esenciales o importantes reguladas por dichos acuerdos, incluido un resumen del análisis de riesgos para evaluar las repercusiones de dichos cambios, y al menos de los incidentes graves relacionados con las TIC y sus repercusiones, así como de las medidas de respuesta, recuperación y corrección.
|
|
|
Incidencias vinculadas
Vínculos
| Tipo de vínculo |
Incidencia |
|
is related to
|
Annual |
|
is related to
|
relative Control Weighting = 10 |
|
is related to
|
People |
|
is related to
|
Identify |
|
is related to
|
SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL |
|
is related to
|
SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL |
|
blocks
|
Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Access |
|
blocks
|
Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets |
|
blocks
|
Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity |
|
blocks
|
Business / Service Interruption |
|
blocks
|
Data Loss / Integrity Compromise |
|
blocks
|
Reduced Operational Productivity |
|
blocks
|
System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector) |
|
blocks
|
System / Data Compromise (Non-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
|
Lack of a security-minded workforce |
|
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 |
|
is related to
|
SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
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
|
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
|
SP-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
OPS-10.01B |
|
blocks
|
OPS-32.03B |
|
is blocked by
|
HRS-04 Defined Roles & Responsibilities – Assessment Procedure |
|
blocks
|
PM-13 Security and Privacy Workforce |
|
blocks
|
PS-09 Position Descriptions |
|
blocks
|
PS-09 [L] Position Descriptions |
|
blocks
|
PS-09 [M] Position Descriptions |
|
blocks
|
PS-09 [H] Position Descriptions |
|
blocks
|
PM-13 [P] Security and Privacy Workforce |
|
blocks
|
03.01.22 Publicly Accessible Content |
|
blocks
|
03.02.02 Role-Based Training |
|
blocks
|
03.06.04 Incident Response Training |
|
blocks
|
03.06.05 Incident Response Plan |
|
blocks
|
03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel |
|
blocks
|
03.08.02 Media Access |
|
blocks
|
03.15.03 Rules of Behavior |
|
blocks
|
03.16.03 External System Services |
|
blocks
|
GV.RM-05 Lines of communication across the organization are established for cybersecurity risks, including risks from suppliers and other third parties |
|
blocks
|
GV.RR Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities |
|
blocks
|
GV.RR-02 Roles, responsibilities, and authorities related to cybersecurity risk management are established, communicated, understood, and enforced |
|
blocks
|
ID.AM Asset Management |
|
blocks
|
PO.2 Implement Roles and Responsibilities |
|
blocks
|
PO.2.1 Create new roles and alter responsibilities for existing roles as needed to encompass all parts of the SDLC. Periodically review and maintain the … |
- 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.
|