+Periodic Review & Update of Security, Compliance & Resilience Program

Periodic Review & Update of Security, Compliance & Resilience Program

Description

Mechanisms exist to review the Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP), including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Annual human reviews of policies and procedures
∙ Documentation change control (version history in document)
∙ Calendar reminders for review cycles

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

∙ Annual human reviews with documented review log
∙ Documentation change control with version history
∙ Defined policy review and approval process

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

∙ Documented review cycle (minimum annual) with ownership assignment
∙ Change control process with approval workflows
∙ Document management system with review reminders (e.g., SharePoint, PolicyTech)

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

∙ Formalized policy lifecycle management (create, review, retire)
∙ Automated review reminders via policy management platform
∙ GRC-integrated documentation change control
∙ Triggered reviews for significant regulatory or organizational changes

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

∙ Enterprise policy lifecycle management integrated with GRC platform
∙ Automated review workflows with escalation paths
∙ Regulatory change monitoring integrated with policy review triggers
∙ Audit-ready documentation of all policy changes and approvals

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

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Governance-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel perform an annual documentation review process that includes the scope of applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual obligations.
▪ Recommendations for documentation edits are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with documentation change control processes.
▪ Updated documentation versions are published, based on no less than an annual review cycle.

Level 3 Well Defined

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain GOV 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).
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to review the Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP), including policies, standards and procedures, at planned intervals or if significant changes occur to ensure their continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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. Áttekintés

1.1 Hivatkozások

1.2 Azonosított követelmények

1.3 Kapcsolódó szabályozások

2. Azonosított követelmények

Követelmények

3. Kapcsolódó szabályozások

Szabályozások
EULAW 2. cikk Az IKT-biztonsági szabályzatok, eljárások, protokollok és eszközök általános elemei
EULAW 2. cikk Az IKT-biztonsági szabályzatok, eljárások, protokollok és eszközök általános elemei
EULAW 3. cikk IKT-kockázatkezelés

3. cikk

IKT-kockázatkezelés

A pénzügyi szervezetek olyan IKT-kockázatkezelési szabályzatokat és eljárásokat dolgoznak ki, dokumentálnak és hajtanak végre, amelyek a következők mindegyikét tartalmazzák:

a) 

az (EU) 2022/2554 rendelet 6. cikke (8) bekezdésének b) pontjával összhangban megállapított IKT-kockázati toleranciaszint jóváhagyásának feltüntetése;

b) 

az IKT-kockázatértékelés elvégzésének eljárása és módszertana, szerepeltetve a következőket:

i. 

a támogatott üzleti funkciókat, az IKT-rendszereket és az e funkciókat támogató IKT-eszközöket érintő vagy esetlegesen érintő sérülékenységek és fenyegetések;

ii. 

az i. alpontban említett sérülékenységek és fenyegetések hatásának és valószínűségének mérésére szolgáló mennyiségi és minőségi mutatók;

c) 

az azonosított és értékelt IKT-kockázatokhoz tartozó IKT-kockázatkezelési intézkedések azonosítására, végrehajtására és dokumentálására szolgáló eljárás, beleértve az ahhoz szükséges IKT-kockázatkezelési intézkedések meghatározását, hogy az IKT-kockázat az a) pontban említett kockázati toleranciaszinten belül maradjon;

d) 

a c) pontban említett IKT-kockázatkezelési intézkedések végrehajtását követően még fennálló fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok esetében:

i. 

a fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok azonosítására vonatkozó rendelkezések;

ii. 

a következőkkel kapcsolatos szerep- és felelősségi körök kijelölése:

(1) 

a pénzügyi szervezet a) pontban említett kockázati toleranciaszintjét meghaladó fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok elfogadása;

(2) 

az e d) pont iv. alpontjában említett felülvizsgálati eljárás;

iii. 

az elfogadott fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok jegyzékének kidolgozása, beleértve elfogadásuk indokolását is;

iv. 

az elfogadott fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok legalább évente egyszer történő felülvizsgálatára vonatkozó rendelkezések, beleértve a következőket:

(1) 

a fennmaradó IKT-kockázatokban bekövetkező változások azonosítása;

(2) 

a rendelkezésre álló kockázatcsökkentő intézkedések értékelése;

(3) 

annak értékelése, hogy a fennmaradó IKT-kockázatok elfogadását indokoló okok a felülvizsgálat időpontjában még mindig érvényesek-e és alkalmazandók-e;

e) 

az alábbiak nyomon követésére vonatkozó rendelkezések:

i. 

az IKT-kockázatokban és a kiberfenyegetettségi helyzetben bekövetkező változások;

ii. 

belső és külső sérülékenységek és fenyegetések;

iii. 

a pénzügyi szervezet IKT-kockázatának nyomon követése, amely lehetővé teszi az IKT-kockázati profilját esetlegesen befolyásoló változások azonnali észlelését;

f) 

azon folyamatra vonatkozó rendelkezések, amely biztosítja, hogy a pénzügyi szervezet üzleti stratégiájában és digitális működési rezilienciára vonatkozó stratégiájában bekövetkező változásokat figyelembe vegyék.

Az első bekezdés c) pontjának alkalmazásában az említett pontban említett eljárásnak biztosítania kell a következőket:

a) 

a végrehajtott IKT-kockázatkezelési intézkedések hatékonyságának nyomon követése;

b) 

annak értékelése, hogy a pénzügyi szervezet elérte-e a megállapított kockázati toleranciaszinteket;

c) 

annak értékelése, hogy a pénzügyi szervezet szükség esetén tett-e lépéseket ezen intézkedések kijavítására vagy jobbá tételére.

Kapcsolt feladatok

Kapcsolatok
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 08
is related to Process
is related to Govern
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
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 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 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 = 07
blocks Failure to Achieve Strategic / Mission Objectives
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
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 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 Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OIS-01.02B
blocks SP-02.01B
blocks SP-02.02B
blocks CRY-01.02B
is blocked by GOV-04.1 Periodic Review & Update of Security, Compliance & Resilience Program – Assessment Procedure
blocks AC-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks AT-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks AU-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks CA-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks CM-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks CP-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks IA-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks IR-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks MA-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks PE-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks PL-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks PM-01 Information Security Program Plan
blocks PS-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks PT-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks RA-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks SA-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks SI-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks SR-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks AC-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks AT-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks AU-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks CA-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks CM-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks CP-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks IA-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks IR-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks MA-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks PE-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks PL-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks PS-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks RA-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks SA-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks SI-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks SR-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks AC-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks AT-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks AU-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks CA-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks CM-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks CP-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks IA-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks IR-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks MA-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks PE-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks PL-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks PS-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks RA-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks SA-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks SI-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks SR-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks AC-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks AT-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks AU-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks CA-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks CM-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks CP-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks IA-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks IR-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks MA-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks PL-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks PS-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks RA-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks SA-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks SC-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks SI-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks SR-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks AC-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks AT-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks AU-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks CA-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks CM-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks IR-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks PL-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks PT-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks RA-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks SA-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks SI-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks 03.15.01 Policy and Procedures
blocks 03.15.03 Rules of Behavior
blocks GV.PO-02 Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is reviewed, updated, communicated, and enforced to reflect changes in requirements, threats, technology, and …
blocks GV.OV Oversight
blocks GV.OV-01 Cybersecurity risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed to inform and adjust strategy and direction
blocks GV.OV-02 The cybersecurity risk management strategy is reviewed and adjusted to ensure coverage of organizational requirements and risks
  • 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.