+Encrypting Data In Transit
|
Encrypting Data In Transit
Description
Cryptographic mechanisms exist to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of data in transit.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
∙ IPSec encryption
∙ Encrypted Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
∙ IPSec encryption
∙ Encrypted Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
∙ IPSec encryption
∙ Encrypted Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
∙ IPSec encryption
∙ Encrypted Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ NIST Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) (https://csrc.nist.gov)
∙ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
∙ IPSec encryption
∙ Encrypted Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
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
Cryptographic Protections (CRY) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CRY domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Cryptography management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel provide an encryption solution (software or hardware) for the storage of sensitive/regulated data.
▪ Sensitive/regulated data is encrypted in transit according to standardized processes.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Cryptographic Protections (CRY) 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 CRY domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CRY 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 CRY domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Cryptographic management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Cryptographic management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) that store, process or transmit sensitive/regulated data use cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure of information as an alternate to physical safeguards.
▪ External compliance requirements for cryptography are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to implement cryptographic mechanisms that are applicability for statutory, regulatory and/or contractual compliance obligations.
▪ Sensitive/regulated data is encrypted at rest using cryptographic protections that are commensurate with the sensitivity of the data.
▪ Sensitive/regulated data is encrypted during transmission using cryptographic protections that are commensurate with the sensitivity of the data.
Level 3 Well Defined
Cryptographic Protections (CRY) 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 CRY 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 CRY domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A security engineering team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CRY domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of cryptographic protections operations (e.g., PKI management tool).
▪ 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 CRY 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 cryptographic capability exists to protect the confidentiality of data being transmitted.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Cryptographic Protections (CRY) 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. Pregled
1.1 Reference
1.2 Utvrđeni zahtjevi
1.3 Povezani propisi
2. Utvrđeni zahtjevi
3. Povezani propisi
Propisi
| Izvor |
Regulativa |
|
EULAW
|
Članak 6. Enkripcija i kriptografske kontrole
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 6. Enkripcija i kriptografske kontrole
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 13. Upravljanje mrežnom sigurnosti
Članak 13.
Upravljanje mrežnom sigurnosti
Financijski subjekti u sklopu mjera zaštite mreža od neovlaštenih upada i zlouporabe podataka izrađuju, dokumentiraju i provode politike, postupke, protokole i alate za upravljanje mrežnom sigurnosti, što uključuje sve sljedeće:
(a)
razdvajanje i segmentaciju IKT sustavâ i mreža, pri čemu se uzimaju u obzir:
i.
ključnost ili važnost funkcije koja se podupire IKT sustavima i mrežama;
ii.
klasifikacija utvrđena u skladu s člankom 8. stavkom 1. Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554;
iii.
ukupni profil rizičnosti IKT imovine za koju se ti IKT sustavi i mreže upotrebljavaju;
(b)
dokumentiranje svih mrežnih veza i tokova podataka financijskog subjekta;
(c)
upotrebu zasebne namjenske mreže za upravljanje IKT imovinom;
(d)
utvrđivanje i provedbu kontrole pristupa mreži kako bi se spriječilo i otkrilo povezivanje neovlaštenih uređaja ili sustava na mrežu financijskog sustava ili krajnje točke koje ne ispunjavaju zahtjeve financijskog subjekta za sigurnost;
(e)
enkripciju mrežnih veza koje prolaze kroz korporativne mreže, javne mreže, domaće mreže, mreže treće strane i bežične mreže u pogledu komunikacijskih protokola koji se upotrebljavaju, pri čemu se uzimaju u obzir rezultati odobrene klasifikacije podataka, rezultati procjene IKT rizika i enkripcija mrežnih veza iz članka 6. stavka 2.;
(f)
oblikovanje mreža u skladu sa zahtjevima za sigurnost IKT-a koje utvrdi financijski subjekt, pri čemu se uzimaju u obzir vodeće prakse kako bi se osigurala povjerljivost, cjelovitost i dostupnost mreže;
(g)
zaštitu mrežnog prometa između unutarnjih mreža i interneta te drugih vanjskih veza;
(h)
utvrđivanje uloga i odgovornosti te koraka za određivanje, provedbu, odobrenje, promjenu i preispitivanje pravila za vatrozid i filtara veza;
(i)
provedbu preispitivanja mrežne strukture i oblikovanja mrežne sigurnosti jedanput godišnje, a periodički za mikropoduzeća, kako bi se utvrdile potencijalne ranjivosti;
(j)
mjere za privremenu izolaciju, prema potrebi, podmreža te mrežnih komponenata i uređaja;
(k)
provedbu polazne sigurne konfiguracije svih mrežnih komponenata te povećanje sigurnosti mreže i mrežnih uređaja u skladu s uputama dobavljača te, prema potrebi, primjenjivim standardima kako su definirani u članku 2. točki 1. Uredbe (EU) br. 1025/2012 i vodećim praksama;
(l)
postupke za ograničavanje, zaključavanje i prekid rada sustava i daljinskih sesija nakon određenog razdoblja neaktivnosti;
(m)
za ugovore o mrežnim uslugama:
i.
utvrđivanje i specifikaciju mjera za sigurnost IKT-a i informacijsku sigurnost, razina usluge i zahtjeva za upravljanje za sve mrežne usluge;
ii.
pruža li te usluge pružatelj IKT usluga unutar grupe ili treća strana pružatelj IKT usluga.
Za potrebe točke (h) financijski subjekti redovito provode preispitivanje pravila za vatrozid i filtara veza u skladu s klasifikacijom iz članka 8. stavka 1. Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554 i ukupnim profilnom rizičnosti uključenih IKT sustava. Za IKT sustave kojima se podupiru ključne ili važne funkcije, financijski subjekti barem svakih šest mjeseci provjeravaju primjerenost postojećih pravila za vatrozid i filtara veza.
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 14. Zaštita podataka u prijenosu
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 14. Zaštita podataka u prijenosu
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 35. Sigurnost podataka i sustava te mrežna sigurnost
Članak 35.
Sigurnost podataka i sustava te mrežna sigurnost
Financijski subjekti iz članka 16. stavka 1. Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554 u sklopu svojih sustava, protokola i alata izrađuju i provode zaštitne mjere kojima se mreže štite od neovlaštenih upada i zlouporabe podataka te održava dostupnost, vjerodostojnost, cjelovitost i povjerljivost podataka. Konkretno, uzimajući u obzir klasifikaciju iz članka 30. stavka 1. ove Uredbe, financijski subjekti uspostavljaju sve sljedeće:
(a)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera za zaštitu podataka u upotrebi, prijenosu i mirovanju;
(b)
utvrđivanje i provedbu sigurnosnih mjera povezanih s upotrebom softvera, medija za pohranu podataka, sustava i krajnjih uređaja za prijenos i pohranu podataka financijskog subjekta;
(c)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera za sprečavanje i otkrivanje neovlaštenih povezivanja na mrežu financijskog subjekta, kao i za zaštitu mrežnog prometa između unutarnjih mreža financijskog subjekta i interneta te drugih vanjskih veza;
(d)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera kojima se osigurava dostupnost, vjerodostojnost, cjelovitost i povjerljivost podataka tijekom mrežnog prijenosa;
(e)
proces za sigurno brisanje podataka koji se nalaze u prostorima financijskog subjekta ili su vanjski pohranjeni, a koje financijski subjekt više ne treba prikupljati ili pohranjivati;
(f)
proces za sigurno odlaganje ili stavljanje izvan funkcije uređaja za pohranu podataka koji se nalaze u prostorima ili su vanjski pohranjeni, a koji sadržavaju povjerljive informacije;
(g)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera kako rad na daljinu i upotreba privatnih krajnjih uređaja ne bi negativno utjecali na sposobnost financijskog subjekta da obavlja ključne aktivnosti na odgovarajući, pravodoban i siguran način.
|
|
EULAW
|
Članak 35. Sigurnost podataka i sustava te mrežna sigurnost
Članak 35.
Sigurnost podataka i sustava te mrežna sigurnost
Financijski subjekti iz članka 16. stavka 1. Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554 u sklopu svojih sustava, protokola i alata izrađuju i provode zaštitne mjere kojima se mreže štite od neovlaštenih upada i zlouporabe podataka te održava dostupnost, vjerodostojnost, cjelovitost i povjerljivost podataka. Konkretno, uzimajući u obzir klasifikaciju iz članka 30. stavka 1. ove Uredbe, financijski subjekti uspostavljaju sve sljedeće:
(a)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera za zaštitu podataka u upotrebi, prijenosu i mirovanju;
(b)
utvrđivanje i provedbu sigurnosnih mjera povezanih s upotrebom softvera, medija za pohranu podataka, sustava i krajnjih uređaja za prijenos i pohranu podataka financijskog subjekta;
(c)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera za sprečavanje i otkrivanje neovlaštenih povezivanja na mrežu financijskog subjekta, kao i za zaštitu mrežnog prometa između unutarnjih mreža financijskog subjekta i interneta te drugih vanjskih veza;
(d)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera kojima se osigurava dostupnost, vjerodostojnost, cjelovitost i povjerljivost podataka tijekom mrežnog prijenosa;
(e)
proces za sigurno brisanje podataka koji se nalaze u prostorima financijskog subjekta ili su vanjski pohranjeni, a koje financijski subjekt više ne treba prikupljati ili pohranjivati;
(f)
proces za sigurno odlaganje ili stavljanje izvan funkcije uređaja za pohranu podataka koji se nalaze u prostorima ili su vanjski pohranjeni, a koji sadržavaju povjerljive informacije;
(g)
utvrđivanje i provedbu mjera kako rad na daljinu i upotreba privatnih krajnjih uređaja ne bi negativno utjecali na sposobnost financijskog subjekta da obavlja ključne aktivnosti na odgovarajući, pravodoban i siguran način.
|
Povezani zadaci
- 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.
|