+User Threat Reporting

User Threat Reporting

Description

Mechanisms exist to incorporate submissions from users of phishing attempts, spam or otherwise malicious actions to better protect the organization.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Provide staff with a way to report phishing emails

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

∙ Phishing report button (e.g., Outlook add-in)
∙ User reporting procedure

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

∙ User threat reporting capability (e.g., Proofpoint PhishAlarm, KnowBe4 PAB)
∙ SOC triage process

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

∙ Enterprise phishing reporting platform with automated triage
∙ SOC review workflow

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

∙ Enterprise user threat reporting (e.g., Cofense, Proofpoint)
∙ Automated triage and response
∙ SOAR integration
∙ Feedback loop to users

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

Network Security (NET) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with NET domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Network security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Network Security (NET) 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 NET domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with NET 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 NET domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Network security-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Network security 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 personnel define secure networking practices to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the organization's TAASD.
▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies.

Level 3 Well Defined

Network Security (NET) 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 NET 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 NET domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A network security management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain NET domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of network security operations (e.g., network management solution and log aggregator).
▪ 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 NET 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).
▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce the principles of least privileges and least functionality for boundary protection technologies.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to incorporate submissions from users of phishing attempts, spam or otherwise malicious actions to better protect the organization.

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. Ülevaade

Pealkiri Standard

1.1 Viited

1.2 Tuvastatud nõuded

1.3 Seotud regulatsioonid

2. Tuvastatud nõuded

Nõuded
Allikas Nõue

3. Seotud regulatsioonid

Regulatsioonid
Allikas Regulatsioon

Lingitud teemad

Lingid
Lingi tüüp Teema
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 01
is related to Process
is related to Protect
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Identity Compromise / Impersonation
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Fraud / Theft / Direct Financial Loss
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks Lack of a security-minded workforce
blocks Drought & Water Shortage
blocks Earthquakes
blocks Fire & Wildfires
blocks Floods
blocks Hurricanes & Tropical Storms
blocks Landslides & Debris Flow
blocks Pandemic (Disease) Outbreaks
blocks Severe Weather
blocks Space Weather
blocks Thunderstorms & Lightning
blocks Tornadoes
blocks Tsunamis
blocks Volcanoes
blocks Winter Storms & Extreme Cold
blocks Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Hazardous Materials Emergencies
blocks Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Weapons
blocks Terrorism & Armed Attacks
blocks Utility Service Disruption
blocks Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Hazardous / Degraded Operational Environment
blocks Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
is blocked by NET-40.8 User Threat Reporting – Assessment Procedure