+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. Panoramica

1.1 Riferimenti

1.2 Requisiti identificati

1.3 Regolamentazioni correlate

2. Requisiti identificati

Requisiti

3. Regolamentazioni correlate

Regolamentazioni
EULAW Articolo 2 Elementi generali delle politiche, delle procedure, dei protocolli e degli strumenti per la sicurezza delle TIC
-
EULAW Articolo 2 Elementi generali delle politiche, delle procedure, dei protocolli e degli strumenti per la sicurezza delle TIC
-
EULAW Articolo 3 Gestione dei rischi informatici

Articolo 3

Gestione dei rischi informatici

Le entità finanziarie elaborano, documentano e attuano politiche e procedure per la gestione dei rischi informatici contenenti tutti gli elementi seguenti:

a) 

l’indicazione dell’approvazione del livello di tolleranza per i rischi informatici stabilito in conformità dell’articolo 6, paragrafo 8, lettera b), del regolamento (UE) 2022/2554;

b) 

una procedura e una metodologia per condurre la valutazione dei rischi informatici, che identifichino:

i) 

le vulnerabilità e le minacce che interessano o potrebbero interessare le funzioni commerciali supportate, i sistemi di TIC e le risorse TIC che supportano tali funzioni;

ii) 

gli indicatori quantitativi o qualitativi per misurare l’impatto e la probabilità delle vulnerabilità e delle minacce di cui al punto i);

c) 

la procedura per identificare, attuare e documentare le misure di trattamento dei rischi informatici per i rischi identificati e valutati, compresa la determinazione delle misure di trattamento dei rischi informatici necessarie per far rientrare il rischio informatico nel livello di tolleranza per i rischi di cui alla lettera a);

d) 

per i rischi informatici residui ancora presenti dopo l’attuazione delle misure di trattamento dei rischi informatici di cui alla lettera c):

i) 

disposizioni relative all’identificazione di tali rischi informatici residui;

ii) 

l’assegnazione di ruoli e responsabilità per quanto riguarda:

(1) 

l’accettazione dei rischi informatici residui che superano il livello di tolleranza per i rischi dell’entità finanziaria di cui alla lettera a);

(2) 

il processo di riesame di cui al punto iv) della presente lettera d);

iii) 

l’elaborazione di un inventario dei rischi informatici residui accettati, compresa la motivazione della loro accettazione;

iv) 

disposizioni relative al riesame, almeno una volta all’anno, dei rischi informatici residui accettati, che comprendano:

1) 

l’identificazione di eventuali cambiamenti nei rischi informatici residui;

2) 

la valutazione delle misure di attenuazione disponibili;

3) 

la valutazione della validità e dell’applicabilità, alla data del riesame, delle motivazioni che giustificano l’accettazione dei rischi informatici residui;

e) 

disposizioni sul monitoraggio:

i) 

di qualsiasi cambiamento nel panorama dei rischi informatici e delle minacce informatiche;

ii) 

di vulnerabilità e minacce interne ed esterne;

iii) 

del rischio informatico dell’entità finanziaria, che consentano di individuare tempestivamente i cambiamenti che potrebbero influire sul suo profilo di rischio informatico;

f) 

disposizioni relative a un processo per garantire che si tenga conto di eventuali modifiche alla strategia aziendale e alla strategia di resilienza operativa digitale dell’entità finanziaria.

Ai fini del primo comma, lettera c), la procedura di cui a tale lettera garantisce:

a) 

il monitoraggio dell’efficacia delle misure di trattamento dei rischi informatici attuate;

b) 

la valutazione del raggiungimento dei livelli di tolleranza per i rischi fissati dall’entità finanziaria;

c) 

la valutazione del fatto che l’entità finanziaria abbia intrapreso azioni per correggere o migliorare tali misure, ove necessario.

Ticket collegati

Collegamenti
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