+Incident Handling
---+Correlation with External Organizations

Incident Handling

Description

Mechanisms exist to cover:
(1) Preparation;
(2) Automated event detection or manual incident report intake;
(3) Analysis;
(4) Containment;
(5) Eradication; and
(6) Recovery.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Incident Response Plan (IRP)

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

∙ Incident Response Plan (IRP)

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

∙ Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) ∙ Incident and problem management

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

∙ Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) ∙ Incident and problem management

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

∙ Integrated Incident Response Program (IIRP)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com) ∙ Incident and problem management

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

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 and 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.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel facilitate prompt response to suspected or confirmed security incidents, including timely notification to affected stakeholders.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel operate facilitate basic forensic investigations in the event of a suspected or confirmed security incident.
▪ The IRP contains eDiscovery processes to support Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) requirements for eDiscovery practices.
▪ IT personnel support incident response operations by provisioning and deprovisioning incident responders with temporary emergency accounts.

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).
▪ 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 cover:
(1) Preparation;
(2) Automated event detection or manual incident report intake;
(3) Analysis;
(4) Containment;
(5) Eradication; and
(6) Recovery.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Incident Response (IRO) 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. Yleiskatsaus

Correlation with External Organizations

Description

Mechanisms exist to coordinate with approved third-parties to achieve a cross-organization perspective on incident awareness and more effective incident responses.

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

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

SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required.
▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization.
▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).

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).
▪ 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 coordinate with approved third-parties to achieve a cross-organization perspective on incident awareness and more effective incident responses.

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 Viittaukset

1.2 Tunnistetut vaatimukset

1.3 Liittyvät säädökset

2. Tunnistetut vaatimukset

Vaatimukset

3. Liittyvät säädökset

Säädökset
EULAW 22 artikla TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien hallinnan toimintaperiaatteet

22 artikla

TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien hallinnan toimintaperiaatteet

Finanssiyhteisöjen on osana mekanismeja, joilla havaitaan poikkeavaa toimintaa, mukaan lukien TVT-verkon suorituskykyyn liittyvät ongelmat ja TVT:hen liittyvät poikkeamat, laadittava, dokumentoitava ja otettava käyttöön TVT:hen liittyviä poikkeamia koskevat toimintaperiaatteet, joiden avulla niiden on

a) 

dokumentoitava asetuksen (EU) 2022/2554 17 artiklassa tarkoitettu TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien hallintaprosessi;

b) 

laadittava luettelo sisäisissä toiminnoissa ja ulkoisissa sidosryhmissä olevista yhteyspisteistä, jotka osallistuvat suoraan TVT-toimien turvallisuuteen, mukaan lukien

i) 

kyberuhkien havaitsemiseen ja seurantaan;

ii) 

poikkeavan toiminnan havaitsemiseen;

iii) 

haavoittuvuuksien hallintaan;

c) 

laadittava, toteutettava ja käytettävä teknisiä, organisatorisia ja operatiivisia mekanismeja, joilla tuetaan TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien hallintaprosessia, mukaan lukien mekanismit, joiden avulla voidaan nopeasti havaita poikkeava toiminta ja käyttäytyminen tämän asetuksen 23 artiklan mukaisesti;

▼C1

d) 

säilytettävä komission delegoidun asetuksen (EU) 2024/1772 ( 2 ) 8 artiklan 2 kohdan ja unionin oikeuden nojalla mahdollisesti sovellettavien säilyttämisvaatimusten mukaisesti kaikki TVT:hen liittyviin poikkeamiin liittyvä näyttö tietyn ajan, joka ei saa olla pidempi kuin on tarpeen niihin tarkoituksiin, joita varten tiedot on kerätty, ja joka on oikeassa suhteessa asianomaisten liiketoimintojen, tukiprosessien sekä TVT- ja tieto-omaisuuden kriittisyyteen;

▼B

e) 

laadittava ja otettava käyttöön mekanismit, joilla analysoidaan merkittäviä tai toistuvia TVT:hen liittyviä poikkeamia ja TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien lukumäärässä ja esiintymistiheydessä esiintyviä kaavoja.

Sovellettaessa d alakohtaa finanssiyhteisöjen on säilytettävä kyseisessä alakohdassa tarkoitettu näyttö tietoturvallisesti.
EULAW 23 artikla Poikkeavan toiminnan havaitseminen ja kriteerit TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien havaitsemiseen ja niihin reagointiin
-
EULAW 31 artikla TVT-riskienhallinta
-
EULAW 9 artikla Suojaaminen ja ehkäiseminen
-
EULAW 14 artikla Viestintä
-
EULAW 18 artikla TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien ja kyberuhkien luokittelu
-
EULAW 21 artikla Kyberturvallisuusriskien hallintatoimenpiteet
-
EULAW 23 artikla Raportointivelvoitteet
-
EULAW 9 artikla Suojaaminen ja ehkäiseminen
-
EULAW 14 artikla Viestintä
-
EULAW 18 artikla TVT:hen liittyvien poikkeamien ja kyberuhkien luokittelu
-
EULAW 21 artikla Kyberturvallisuusriskien hallintatoimenpiteet
-
EULAW 23 artikla Raportointivelvoitteet
-
EULAW 9 artikla 4

4.   Finanssiyhteisöjen on osana 6 artiklan 1 kohdassa tarkoitettua TVT-riskinhallintajärjestelmää

a)

laadittava ja dokumentoitava tietoturvapolitiikka, jossa määritellään säännöt yhteisöjen ja tarvittaessa niiden asiakkaiden datan, tieto-omaisuuden ja TVT-omaisuuden saatavuuden, aitouden, eheyden ja luottamuksellisuuden suojaamiseksi:

b)

riskiperusteista lähestymistapaa noudattaen otettava käyttöön vankka verkko- ja infrastruktuurin hallinnointirakenne käyttäen asianmukaisia tekniikoita, menetelmiä ja protokollia, joihin voi kuulua automatisoitujen mekanismien toteuttaminen mahdollisen kyberhyökkäyksen yhteydessä vahingoittuneen tieto-omaisuuden eristämiseksi;

c)

otettava käyttöön toimintatavat, joilla rajoitetaan fyysinen tai looginen pääsy tieto-omaisuuteen ja TVT-omaisuuteen vain siihen, mikä on tarpeen oikeutettuja ja hyväksyttyjä toimintoja ja tehtäviä varten, ja laaditaan tätä varten toimintaperiaatteet, menettelyt ja valvontatoimet, joissa määritellään pääsyoikeudet ja varmistetaan sen moitteeton hallinnointi;

d)

toteutettava vahvan todentamisen mekanismien edellyttämät toimintatavat ja protokollat asiaa koskevien standardien ja erityisten valvontajärjestelmien pohjalta, sekä niiden salausavaimien suojaustoimenpiteet, joilla data on salattu, hyväksyttyjen datan luokittelua ja TVT-riskinarviointia koskevien prosessien tulosten perusteella;

e)

toteutettava TVT-muutosten hallintaa koskevat dokumentoidut toimintaperiaatteet, menettelyt ja valvontatoimet, joissa otetaan huomioon ohjelmistojen, laitteiden, laiteohjelmistokomponenttien, järjestelmien tai turvaparametrien muutokset ja jotka perustuvat riskinarviointiin ja ovat olennainen osa finanssiyhteisön yleistä muutoksenhallintaprosessia, jotta voidaan varmistaa, että kaikki TVT-järjestelmien muutokset tallennetaan, testataan, arvioidaan, hyväksytään, toteutetaan ja todennetaan valvotusti;

f)

otettava käyttöön ohjelmisto- ja korjauspäivityksiä koskevat asianmukaiset ja kattavat dokumentoidut toimintaperiaatteet.

Ensimmäisen alakohdan b alakohdan soveltamiseksi finanssiyhteisöjen on suunniteltava verkkoyhteysinfrastruktuuri siten, että se voidaan irrottaa tai segmentoida välittömästi, jotta voidaan minimoida ja estää häiriöiden leviäminen erityisesti toisiinsa sidoksissa olevien rahoitusprosessien yhteydessä.

Ensimmäisen alakohdan e alakohdan soveltamiseksi TVT-muutoksenhallintaprosessin on saatava asianmukaisten hallintolinjojen hyväksyntä ja siinä on oltava erityiset protokollat.
EULAW 14 artikla 1

1.   Finanssiyhteisöjen on osana 6 artiklan 1 kohdassa tarkoitettua TVT-riskinhallintajärjestelmää toteutettava kriisiviestintäsuunnitelmia, joidenka avulla voidaan vastuullisesti tiedottaa ainakin laajavaikutteisista TVT:hen liittyvistä poikkeamista tai haavoittuvuuksista tarpeen mukaan asiakkaille ja vastapuolille sekä suurelle yleisölle.
EULAW 14 artikla 2

2.   Finanssiyhteisöjen on osana TVT-riskinhallintajärjestelmää toteutettava sekä sisäisen henkilöstön jäsenille että ulkoisille sidosryhmille suunnattua viestintäpolitiikkaa. Henkilöstölle suunnatussa viestintäpolitiikassa on tehtävä ero TVT-riskinhallintaan ja erityisesti reagointi- ja toipumistoimiin osallistuvan henkilöstön ja toisaalta sen henkilöstön välillä, jolle on tiedotettava kyseisistä toimista.
EULAW 14 artikla 3

3.   Finanssiyhteisössä on oltava ainakin yksi henkilö, jonka tehtävänä on toteuttaa TVT:hen liittyviä poikkeamia koskeva viestintästrategia ja vastata tähän liittyvästä tiedottamisesta yleisölle ja tiedotusvälineille.
EULAW 18 artikla 1

1.   Finanssiyhteisöjen on luokiteltava TVT:hen liittyvät poikkeamat ja määriteltävä niiden vaikutukset seuraavien kriteerien perusteella:

a)

niiden asiakkaiden tai finanssialan vastapuolien lukumäärä ja/tai merkityksellisyys, ja tarvittaessa toteutuneiden liiketoimien määrä tai lukumäärä, joihin TVT:hen liittyvä poikkeama on vaikuttanut, ja tieto siitä, onko TVT:hen liittyvällä poikkeamalla ollut maineeseen liittyviä vaikutuksia;

b)

TVT:hen liittyvän poikkeaman kesto, palvelukatkos mukaan lukien;

c)

sen alueen maantieteellinen laajuus, johon TVT:hen liittyvä poikkeama vaikuttaa, varsinkin jos se vaikuttaa useampaan kuin kahteen jäsenvaltioon;

d)

TVT:hen liittyvän poikkeaman aiheuttamat datan menetykset datan saatavuuden, aitouden, eheyden tai luottamuksellisuuden osalta;

e)

vaikutusten kohteena olevien palvelujen kriittisyys, finanssiyhteisön liiketoimet ja toiminnot mukaan lukien;

f)

TVT:hen liittyvän poikkeaman taloudelliset vaikutukset, erityisesti välittömät ja välilliset kustannukset ja tappiot, sekä absoluuttisesti että suhteellisesti ilmaistuna.
EULAW 18 artikla 2

2.   Finanssiyhteisöjen on luokiteltava kyberuhat merkittäviksi riskinalaisten palvelujen, mukaan lukien finanssiyhteisön liiketoimet ja toiminnot, kriittisyyden, kohteena olevien asiakkaiden tai finanssialan vastapuolten lukumäärän ja/tai merkityksellisyyden sekä riskialueiden maantieteellisen jakautumisen perusteella.

Linkitetyt tehtävät

Linkit
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Process
is related to Respond
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
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 Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
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 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 relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks OT Safety / Process Availability Failure
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Data / Service Availability
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 Civil or Political Unrest
blocks Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Hazardous Materials Emergencies
blocks Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Weapons
blocks Physical Crime
blocks Terrorism & Armed Attacks
blocks Utility Service Disruption
blocks Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Economic Shock / Market Disruption
blocks Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
blocks OPS-07.02B
blocks OPS-13.03AC
blocks OPS-18.01B
blocks OPS-19.01B
blocks OPS-20.01B
blocks OPS-21.01B
blocks OPS-30.01B
blocks IAM-01.02B
blocks SIM-02.01B
blocks SIM-03.03AC
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks OT Safety / Process Availability Failure
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Data / Service Availability
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 Civil or Political Unrest
blocks Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Hazardous Materials Emergencies
blocks Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Weapons
blocks Physical Crime
blocks Terrorism & Armed Attacks
blocks Utility Service Disruption
blocks Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Economic Shock / Market Disruption
blocks Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
blocks OPS-07.02B
blocks OPS-13.03AC
blocks OPS-18.01B
blocks OPS-19.01B
blocks OPS-20.01B
blocks OPS-21.01B
blocks OPS-30.01B
blocks IAM-01.02B
blocks SIM-02.01B
blocks SIM-03.03AC
is blocked by IRO-06 Incident Handling – Assessment Procedure
blocks IR-04 Incident Handling
blocks IR-04 [L] Incident Handling
blocks IR-04 [M] Incident Handling
blocks IR-04 [H] Incident Handling
blocks IR-04 [P] Incident Handling
blocks 03.03.04 Response to Audit Logging Process Failures
blocks 03.06.01 Incident Handling
blocks 03.06.02 Incident Monitoring, Reporting, and Response Assistance
blocks 03.06.05 Incident Response Plan
blocks GV.SC-08 Relevant suppliers and other third parties are included in incident planning, response, and recovery activities
blocks DE.AE Adverse Event Analysis
blocks DE.AE-02 Potentially adverse events are analyzed to better understand associated activities
blocks DE.AE-03 Information is correlated from multiple sources
blocks DE.AE-04 The estimated impact and scope of adverse events are understood
blocks DE.AE-06 Information on adverse events is provided to authorized staff and tools
blocks DE.AE-08 Incidents are declared when adverse events meet the defined incident criteria
blocks RS RESPOND
blocks RS.MA Incident Management
blocks RS.MA-01 The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties once an incident is declared
blocks RS.MA-02 Incident reports are triaged and validated
blocks RS.MA-04 Incidents are escalated or elevated as needed
blocks RS.AN Incident Analysis
blocks RS.AN-06 Actions performed during an investigation are recorded, and the records' integrity and provenance are preserved
blocks RS.CO Incident Response Reporting and Communication
blocks RS.CO-02 Internal and external stakeholders are notified of incidents
blocks RS.CO-03 Information is shared with designated internal and external stakeholders
blocks RS.MI Incident Mitigation
blocks RS.MI-01 Incidents are contained
blocks RS.MI-02 Incidents are eradicated
blocks RC.RP-06 The end of incident recovery is declared based on criteria, and incident-related documentation is completed
  • Secure Controls Framework -

    The Secure Controls Framework® (SCF)

    "The SCF is the Common Controls Framework™ (CCF), the world's most comprehensive cybersecurity and data privacy metaframework - it is also free to use. The entire concept is building secure, compliant and resilient capabilities in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible.

    The SCF is more than just a unified control catalog, since its included content creates a playbook for Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) capabilities. Used globally by organizations of every size, the SCF is a robust and scalable solution for security, compliance and resilience controls. As a comprehensive security framework, the SCF maps 1,400+ controls across 200+ laws, regulations, and industry frameworks so you can implement once and comply everywhere.

    Like it or not, cybersecurity is a protracted war on an asymmetric battlefield, where the threats are everywhere and as defenders we have to make the effort to work together to help improve cybersecurity and data privacy practices, since we all suffer when massive data breaches occur or when cyber attacks have physical impacts. Hackers share information on attack methods with other hackers, so why shouldn’t the good guys share information on how to best protect an organization? We decided to take action and make a difference, since we feel it is too important to wait for someone else to fix the problems that exist.

    The SCF is made up of volunteers, mainly specialists within the cybersecurity profession, who focus on GRC and the cybersecurity side of data privacy. These are auditors, engineers, architects, incident responders, consultants and other specialists who live and breathe these topics on a daily basis. The end product is "expert-derived content" that makes up the SCF." https://securecontrolsframework.com/ 

    Terms & Conditions

    The SCF End User License Agreement (EULA) governs the use of the Secure Controls Framework® (SCF) under the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License.