+Third-Party Management
|
Third-Party Management
Description
Mechanisms exist to facilitate the implementation of third-party management controls.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Product / project management
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Product / project management
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Product / project management
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Product / project management
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program ∙ Product / project 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
Third-Party Management (TPM) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with TPM domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Third-party management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ No centralized inventory of External Service Providers (ESP) is maintained. ▪ ESP are not formally managed according to criticality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management 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
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor management solution). ▪ 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 TPM 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 facilitate the implementation of third-party management controls.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Third-Party Management (TPM) 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
| Forrás |
Követelmény |
3. Kapcsolódó szabályozások
Szabályozások
| Forrás |
Szabályozás |
|
EULAW
|
8. cikk (4)
A pénzügyi szervezeteknek azonosítaniuk kell valamennyi információs vagyonelemet és IKT-eszközt, ideértve a távoli helyeken találhatókat is, továbbá a hálózati erőforrásokat és a hardvereszközöket, és fel kell térképezniük, hogy melyek tekinthetők kritikusnak. Fel kell térképezniük az információs vagyonelemek és IKT-eszközök konfigurációját, valamint a különböző információs vagyonelemek és IKT-eszközök közötti kapcsolatokat és kölcsönös függőségeket.
|
|
EULAW
|
21. cikk A kiberbiztonsági kockázatkezelési intézkedések
|
|
EULAW
|
28. cikk Irányítás és szervezet
|
|
EULAW
|
29. cikk Információbiztonsági szabályzat és intézkedések
|
|
EULAW
|
30. cikk Főbb szerződéses rendelkezések
|
|
EULAW
|
31. cikk A kritikus harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltatók kijelölése
|
|
EULAW
|
30. cikk Főbb szerződéses rendelkezések
|
|
EULAW
|
31. cikk A kritikus harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltatók kijelölése
|
|
EULAW
|
30. cikk Főbb szerződéses rendelkezések
|
|
EULAW
|
31. cikk A kritikus harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltatók kijelölése
|
|
EULAW
|
30. cikk (3)
A kritikus vagy fontos funkciókat támogató IKT-szolgáltatások igénybevételéről szóló szerződéses megállapodásoknak a (2) bekezdésben említett elemeken felül tartalmazniuk kell legalább a következőket:
a)
a szolgáltatási szintek teljeskörű leírása, beleértve annak frissítéseit és felülvizsgálatait is, a megállapodás szerinti szolgáltatási szinteken belüli pontos mennyiségi és minőségi teljesítménycélokkal együtt, hogy lehetővé váljon az IKT- szolgáltatásoknak a pénzügyi szervezet általi eredményes nyomon követése, és lehetővé váljon megfelelő korrekciós intézkedések indokolatlan késedelem nélküli meghozatala, amikor a megállapodás szerinti szolgáltatási szintek nem teljesülnek;
b)
a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltatóra vonatkozó felmondási idők és a pénzügyi szervezettel szembeni bejelentési kötelezettségei, ideértve bármely olyan fejlemény bejelentését, amely lényeges hatást gyakorolhat a harmadik fél IKT- szolgáltató azon képességére, hogy a megállapodás szerinti szolgáltatási szinteknek megfelelően eredményesen biztosítsa a kritikus vagy fontos funkciókat támogató IKT-szolgáltatásokat;
c)
arra vonatkozó követelmények, hogy a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató vezessen be és teszteljen vészhelyzeti terveket, továbbá rendelkezzen olyan IKT-biztonsági intézkedésekkel, eszközökkel és szabályzatokkal, amelyek biztosítják a megfelelő biztonsági szintet ahhoz, hogy a pénzügyi szervezet a szabályozási keretével összhangban nyújtson szolgáltatásokat;
d)
a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató azon kötelezettsége, hogy – a 26. és a 27. cikkben említettek szerint – részt vegyen és teljes mértékben együttműködjön a pénzügyi szervezet által végzett TLPT-ben;
e)
a pénzügyi szervezet azon joga, hogy folyamatosan monitorozza a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató teljesítményét, ami a következőkkel jár:
i.
a pénzügyi szervezet vagy egy kinevezett harmadik fél, valamint az illetékes hatóság korlátlan hozzáférési, ellenőrzési és audit joga és a releváns dokumentumokról a helyszínen való másolatkészítés joga – amennyiben azok kritikusak a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató műveletei szempontjából –, amelynek tényleges gyakorlását nem akadályozza vagy korlátozza más szerződéses megállapodás vagy végrehajtási szabályzat;
ii.
az alternatív bizonyossági szintekről való megállapodás joga, ha más ügyfelek jogai érintettek;
iii.
a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató azon kötelezettsége, hogy maradéktalanul együttműködjön az illetékes hatóságok, a vezető felvigyázó, a pénzügyi szervezet vagy egy kinevezett harmadik fél által végzett helyszíni ellenőrzések és auditok során; és
iv.
az ilyen ellenőrzések és auditok terjedelmével, követendő eljárásaival és gyakoriságával kapcsolatos részletek megadásának kötelezettsége;
f)
kilépési stratégiák, különösen egy kötelező megfelelő átmeneti időszak meghatározása:
i.
amelynek során a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató folytatja a vonatkozó funkciók és IKT-szolgáltatások nyújtását annak érdekében, hogy csökkentse a pénzügyi szervezetnél keletkező zavar kockázatát, vagy biztosítsa annak eredményes szanálását és szerkezetátalakítását;
ii.
amely lehetővé teszi a pénzügyi szervezet számára, hogy valamely egyéb harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltatóhoz migráljon, vagy házon belüli megoldásokra állhasson át a nyújtott szolgáltatás összetettségének megfelelően.
Az e) ponttól eltérve, a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató és a mikrovállalkozásként működő pénzügyi szervezet megállapodhat arról, hogy a pénzügyi szervezet hozzáférési, ellenőrzési és audit jogai átruházhatók a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató által kinevezett független harmadik félre, valamint hogy a pénzügyi szervezet bármikor tájékoztatást és biztosítékot kérhet a független harmadik féltől a harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató teljesítése tekintetében.
|
|
EULAW
|
31. cikk (12)
A pénzügyi szervezetek csak akkor vehetik igénybe egy harmadik országban letelepedett és az (1) bekezdés a) pontjával összhangban kritikusnak kijelölt harmadik fél IKT-szolgáltató szolgáltatásait, ha az utóbbi a kijelölést követő 12 hónapon belül leányvállalatot létesített az Unióban.
|
Kapcsolt feladatok
Kapcsolatok
| Kapcsolattípus |
Feladat |
|
is related to
|
Annual |
|
is related to
|
relative Control Weighting = 09 |
|
is related to
|
Process |
|
is related to
|
Identify |
|
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
|
Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data |
|
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
|
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
|
Govern |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Manufacturing Capacity / Supply Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01AS |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Manufacturing Capacity / Supply Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01AS |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Manufacturing Capacity / Supply Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
SSO-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01B |
|
blocks
|
SSO-07.01AS |
|
is blocked by
|
TPM-02 Third-Party Management – Assessment Procedure |
|
blocks
|
SA-04 Acquisition Process |
|
blocks
|
SR-01 Policy and Procedures |
|
blocks
|
SA-04 [L] Acquisition Process |
|
blocks
|
SR-01 [L] Policy and Procedures |
|
blocks
|
SA-04 [M] Acquisition Process |
|
blocks
|
SR-01 [M] Policy and Procedures |
|
blocks
|
SA-04 [H] Acquisition Process |
|
blocks
|
SR-01 [H] Policy and Procedures |
|
blocks
|
SA-04 [P] Acquisition Process |
|
blocks
|
03.01.20 Use of External Systems |
|
blocks
|
03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel |
|
blocks
|
03.16.01 Security Engineering Principles |
|
blocks
|
03.16.03 External System Services |
|
blocks
|
03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-04 Suppliers are known and prioritized by criticality |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-06 Planning and due diligence are performed to reduce risks before entering into formal supplier or other third-party relationships |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-07 The risks posed by a supplier, their products and services, and other third parties are understood, recorded, prioritized, assessed, responded to, … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-08 Relevant suppliers and other third parties are included in incident planning, response, and recovery activities |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-10 Cybersecurity supply chain risk management plans include provisions for activities that occur after the conclusion of a partnership or service … |
|
blocks
|
ID.AM Asset Management |
- 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.
|