+Anomalous Behavior
---+Unusual Transactions
|
Anomalous Behavior
Description
Mechanisms exist to utilize User & Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) and/or User Activity Monitoring (UAM) solutions to detect and respond to anomalous behavior that could indicate account compromise or other malicious activities.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Indicators of Compromise (IoC)
∙ Indicators of Exposure (IoE)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Indicators of Compromise (IoC)
∙ Indicators of Exposure (IoE)
∙ Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Indicators of Compromise (IoC)
∙ Indicators of Exposure (IoE)
∙ Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
∙ Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Indicators of Compromise (IoC)
∙ Indicators of Exposure (IoE)
∙ Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
∙ Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Indicators of Compromise (IoC)
∙ Indicators of Exposure (IoE)
∙ Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)
∙ Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
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
Continuous Monitoring (MON) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with MON domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Event monitoring-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Monitoring is primarily reactive in nature, focused on identifying incidents that occurred.
▪ Event log reviews primarily rely on manual processes to identify anomalous behaviors.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 MON domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with MON 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 MON domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Continuous monitoring-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Continuous monitoring 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
Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 MON domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Cybersecurity personnel use a structured process via Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) to review and analyze logs.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain MON domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of continuous monitoring operations (e.g., Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)).
▪ 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 MON 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 security event logging to contain sufficient information to establish necessary details of activity and allow for forensics analysis.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to utilize User & Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) and/or User Activity Monitoring (UAM) solutions to detect and respond to anomalous behavior that could indicate account compromise or other malicious activities.
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. Forbhreathnú
| Teideal |
Caighdeán |
|
Unusual Transactions
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to define "normal business activities" to identify anomalous transaction activities that can reduce the opportunity for sending (outbound) and/or receiving (inbound) hostile and/or fraudulent actions.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Indicators of Fraud (IoF) (e.g., fraud "red flags")
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Indicators of Fraud (IoF) (e.g., fraud "red flags")
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Indicators of Fraud (IoF) (e.g., fraud "red flags")
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Indicators of Fraud (IoF) (e.g., fraud "red flags")
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Indicators of Fraud (IoF) (e.g., fraud "red flags")
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
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Data classification and handling-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Data classification and handling management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ A formalized data classification scheme exists to identify categories of data, based on protection requirements from applicable laws, regulations and/or contractual obligations.
Level 3 Well Defined
Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 MON domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Cybersecurity personnel use a structured process via Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) to review and analyze logs.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain MON domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of continuous monitoring operations (e.g., Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)).
▪ 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 MON 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 security event logging to contain sufficient information to establish necessary details of activity and allow for forensics analysis.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to establish organization-defined "normal business activities" to identify anomalous transaction activities that can reduce the opportunity for sending (outbound) and/or receiving (inbound) fraudulent actions.
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 Tagairtí
1.2 Ceanglais aitheanta
1.3 Rialacháin ghaolmhara
2. Ceanglais aitheanta
Ceanglais
| Foinse |
Ceanglas |
3. Rialacháin ghaolmhara
Rialacháin
| Foinse |
Rialáil |
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 10 1
1. Beidh sásraí i bhfeidhm ag eintitis airgeadais chun gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath go pras, i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 17, lena n-áirítear fadhbanna feidhmíochta gréasáin TFC agus teagmhais a bhaineann le TFC, agus chun pointí teipthe ábharacha aonair a d’fhéadfaí a bheith ann a shainaithint.
Déanfar tástáil rialta ar gach sásra braite dá dtagraítear sa chéad fhomhír i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 25.
|
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 22 Polasaí bainistíochta teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC
Airteagal 22
Polasaí bainistíochta teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC
Mar chuid de na sásraí chun gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath, lena n-áirítear fadhbanna feidhmíochta gréasáin TFC agus teagmhais a bhaineann le TFC, déanfaidh eintitis airgeadais beartas teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC a fhorbairt, a dhoiciméadú agus a chur chun feidhme, trína ndéanfaidh siad na nithe seo a leanas:
(a)
an próiseas bainistithe teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 17 de Rialachán (AE) 2022/2554 a dhoiciméadú;
(b)
liosta a bhunú de theagmhálaithe ábhartha a bhfuil feidhmeanna inmheánacha acu agus de gheallsealbhóirí seachtracha a bhfuil baint dhíreach acu le slándáil oibríochtaí TFC, lena n-áirítear:
(i)
cibearbhagairtí a bhrath agus faireachán a dhéanamh orthu;
(ii)
gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath;
(iii)
bainistíocht leochaileachta;
(c)
sásraí teicniúla, eagraíochtúla agus oibríochtúla a bhunú, a chur chun feidhme agus a oibriú chun tacú leis an bpróiseas bainistithe teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC, lena n-áirítear sásraí lena mbeifear in ann gníomhaíochtaí agus iompraíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath go pras i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 23 den Rialachán seo;
▼C1
(d)
an fhianaise uile atá gaolmhar le teagmhais a bhaineann le TFC a choimeád ar feadh tréimhse nach faide ná mar is gá chun na gcríoch dá mbailítear na sonraí, i gcomhréir le criticiúlacht na bhfeidhmeanna gnó, na bpróiseas tacaíochta agus na sócmhainní TFC agus faisnéise dá ndéantar difear, i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 8(2) de Rialachán Tarmligthe (AE) 2024/1772 ón gCoimisiún (
2
) agus le haon cheanglas coinneála is infheidhme de bhun dhlí an Aontais;
▼B
(e)
sásraí a bhunú agus a chur chun feidhme chun anailís a dhéanamh ar theagmhais mhóra nó athfhillteacha a bhaineann le TFC agus ar phatrúin sa líon teagmhas a bhaineann le TFC agus sa chaoi a dtarlaíonn siad.
Chun críocha phointe (d), déanfaidh eintitis airgeadais an fhianaise dá dtagraítear sa phointe sin a choinneáil ar bhealach slán.
|
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 23 Gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath agus critéir maidir le teagmhais a bhaineann le TFC a bhrath agus maidir leis an bhfreagairt orthu
|
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 23 Gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta a bhrath agus critéir maidir le teagmhais a bhaineann le TFC a bhrath agus maidir leis an bhfreagairt orthu
|
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 34 Slándáil oibríochtaí TFC
Airteagal 34
Déanfaidh na heintitis airgeadais dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 16(1) de Rialachán (AE) 2022/2554 na nithe seo a leanas, mar chuid dá gcórais, prótacail, agus uirlisí, agus maidir leis na sócmhainní TFC uile:
(a)
faireachán agus bainistíocht a dhéanamh ar shaolré na sócmhainní TFC uile;
(b)
faireachán a dhéanamh maidir le cé acu an dtacaíonn nó nach dtacaíonn soláthraithe seirbhíse TFC tríú páirtí eintiteas airgeadais le sócmhainní TFC, i gcás inarb infheidhme;
(c)
riachtanais inniúlachta dá sócmhainní TFC a shainaithint chomh maith le bearta chun infhaighteacht agus éifeachtúlacht na sócmhainní TFC a choinneáil ar bun agus a fheabhsú agus ganntanais maidir le hinniúlacht TFC a chosc sula dtagann siad chun cinn;
(d)
scanadh leochaileachta uathoibrithe agus measúnaithe ar shócmhainní TFC a dhéanamh a thagann lena n-aicmiú dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 30(1) agus le próifíl riosca fhoriomlán na sócmhainne TFC, paistí a chur chun feidhme chun aghaidh a thabhairt ar leochaileachtaí a sainaithníodh;
(e)
rioscaí a bhainistiú a bhaineann le sócmhainní TFC atá imithe as dáta, sócmhainní nach dtacaítear leo, nó sócmhainní leagáidí;
(f)
cuntas a dhéanamh ar theagmhais a bhaineann le rialú rochtana loighciúla nó fisiciúla, oibríochtaí TFC, lena n-áirítear gníomhaíochtaí tráchta iompair agus gréasáin, agus bainistíocht athruithe TFC;
(g)
bearta a shainaithint agus a chur chun feidhme chun faireachán agus anailís a dhéanamh ar fhaisnéis maidir le gníomhaíochtaí aimhrialta agus iompraíocht aimhrialta maidir le hoibríochtaí TFC criticiúla nó tábhachtacha;
(h)
bearta a chur chun feidhme chun faireachán a dhéanamh ar fhaisnéis ábhartha agus atá cothrom le dáta maidir le cibearbhagairtí;
(i)
bearta a chur chun feidhme chun sceitheadh faisnéise, cód mailíseach agus bagairtí slándála eile a d’fhéadfaí a bheith ann a shainaithint, chomh maith le leochaileachtaí atá aitheanta go poiblí i mbogearraí agus crua-earraí a shainaithint, agus seiceáil a dhéanamh maidir le nuashonruithe slándála comhfhreagracha nua.
Chun críocha phointe (f), déanfaidh eintitis airgeadais leibhéal mhionsonra na logaí a ailíniú le cuspóir agus úsáid na sócmhainní TFC a chruthaíonn na logaí sin.
|
|
EULAW
|
Airteagal 10 Brath
-
|
Saincheisteanna nasctha
- 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.
|