+Break Clauses

Break Clauses

Description

Mechanisms exist to include "break clauses" within contracts for failure to meet contract criteria for security, compliance and/or resilience controls.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

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.
▪ Contracts with ESP contain break clauses to enable penalty-free, early termination of a contract for cause, based on ESP cybersecurity and/or data protection practices deficiency(ies).

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 include "break clauses" within contracts for failure to meet contract criteria for security, compliance and/or resilience controls.

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. Panoramica

1.1 Riferimenti

1.2 Requisiti identificati

1.3 Regolamentazioni correlate

2. Requisiti identificati

Requisiti

3. Regolamentazioni correlate

Regolamentazioni
EULAW Articolo 28 Principi generali
-
EULAW Articolo 21 Misure di gestione dei rischi di cibersicurezza
-
EULAW Articolo 28 7

7.   Le entità finanziarie stabiliscono clausole che consentano la risoluzione degli accordi contrattuali per l’utilizzo di servizi TIC in una qualsiasi delle circostanze seguenti:

a)

rilevante violazione, da parte del fornitore terzo di servizi TIC, di leggi, regolamenti o condizioni contrattuali applicabili;

b)

circostanze, identificate nel corso del monitoraggio dei rischi informatici derivanti da terzi, ritenute suscettibili di alterare l’esercizio delle funzioni previsto a norma dell’accordo contrattuale, tra cui modifiche di rilievo che incidano sull’accordo o sulla situazione del fornitore terzo di servizi TIC;

c)

punti deboli del fornitore terzo di servizi TIC emersi riguardo alla sua gestione complessiva dei rischi informatici e, in particolare, nel modo in cui il fornitore garantisce la disponibilità, autenticità, integrità e riservatezza dei dati, siano essi dati personali o altrimenti sensibili, oppure dei dati non personali;

d)

laddove l’autorità competente non sia più in grado di vigilare efficacemente sull’entità finanziaria per via delle condizioni dell’accordo contrattuale in questione o delle circostanze ivi afferenti.
EULAW Articolo 28 8

8.   Per i servizi TIC a supporto di funzioni essenziali o importanti, le entità finanziarie predispongono strategie di uscita. Tali strategie tengono conto dei rischi che possono emergere a livello dei fornitori terzi di servizi TIC, in particolare possibili disfunzioni dei fornitori stessi, il deterioramento della qualità dei servizi TIC forniti, una perturbazione dell’attività commerciale conseguente a una fornitura di servizi TIC inadeguata o carente, oppure gravi rischi connessi all’adeguatezza e alla continuità dell’esercizio del rispettivo servizio TIC oppure la risoluzione di accordi contrattuali con fornitori terzi di servizi TIC in una delle circostanze di cui al paragrafo 7.

Le entità finanziarie garantiscono di poter porre termine agli accordi contrattuali senza:

a)

perturbare le proprie attività commerciali;

b)

limitare il rispetto dei requisiti normativi;

c)

pregiudicare la continuità e la qualità dei servizi forniti ai clienti.

I piani di uscita sono esaustivi, documentati e, conformemente ai criteri di cui all’articolo 4, paragrafo 2, sottoposti a test adeguati e riesaminati periodicamente.

Le entità finanziarie identificano soluzioni alternative ed elaborano piani di transizione che consentano loro di trasferire i servizi TIC previsti dal contratto e i relativi dati dal fornitore terzo di servizi TIC, in maniera sicura e nella loro interezza, a fornitori alternativi oppure reintegrarli al proprio interno.

Le entità finanziarie dispongono di misure di emergenza idonee per mantenere la continuità operativa qualora si verifichino le circostanze di cui al primo comma.

Ticket collegati

Collegamenti
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Process
is related to Protect
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
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 Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
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 Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks SSO-06.01B
blocks SSO-06.02B
is blocked by TPM-19 Break Clauses – Assessment Procedure
blocks SA-09(03) Establish and Maintain Trust Relationship with Providers
blocks 03.17.01 Supply Chain Risk Management Plan
blocks 03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods
blocks 03.17.03 Supply Chain Requirements and Processes
blocks GV.SC-06 Planning and due diligence are performed to reduce risks before entering into formal supplier or other third-party relationships
  • 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.