+Third-Party Contract Requirements
---+Contract Flow-Down Requirements
---+Provider Contingency Plan

Third-Party Contract Requirements

Description

Mechanisms exist to require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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.
▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative.
▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.

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 require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its TAASD.

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. Apžvalga

Contract Flow-Down Requirements

Description

Mechanisms exist to ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable subcontractors and suppliers.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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.
▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative.
▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.

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 ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable sub-contractors and suppliers.

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.
Provider Contingency Plan

Description

Mechanisms exist to contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

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

Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) 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 BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD 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 BCD domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery (BC/DR)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ BC/DR 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 contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

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.

1.1 Nuorodos

1.2 Nustatyti reikalavimai

1.3 Susiję teisės aktai

2. Nustatyti reikalavimai

Reikalavimai

3. Susiję teisės aktai

Teisės aktai
EULAW 11 straipsnis Duomenų ir sistemų apsauga
-
EULAW 13 straipsnis Tinklo saugumo valdymas

13 straipsnis

Tinklo saugumo valdymas

Finansų sektoriaus subjektai parengia, dokumentuoja, įgyvendina ir į savo tinklo apsaugos nuo įsibrovimo ir netinkamo duomenų naudojimo priemones įtraukia tinklo saugumo valdymo politiką, procedūras, protokolus ir priemones, apimančias visus šiuos elementus:

a) 

IRT sistemų ir tinklų atskyrimą ir segmentavimą atsižvelgiant į:

i) 

funkcijų, kurios palaikomos tomis IRT sistemomis ir tinklais, ypatingą svarbą ar svarbumą;

ii) 

klasifikaciją pagal Reglamento (ES) 2022/2554 8 straipsnio 1 dalį;

iii) 

bendrą IRT turto, kuris naudojasi tomis IRT sistemomis ir tinklais, rizikos profilį;

b) 

visų finansų sektoriaus subjekto tinklų ryšių ir duomenų srautų dokumentavimą;

c) 

atskiro skirtojo tinklo naudojimą IRT turtui administruoti;

d) 

tinklo prieigos kontrolės nustatymą ir įgyvendinimą siekiant neleisti prie finansų sektoriaus subjekto tinklo jungtis neturinčiam leidimo įrenginiui ar sistemai arba galiniam įrenginiui, neatitinkančiam finansų sektoriaus subjekto saugumo reikalavimų, ir aptikti tokio jungimosi atvejus;

e) 

tinklų ryšių, vykdomų per įmonių tinklus, viešuosius tinklus, namų ūkių tinklus, trečiųjų šalių tinklus ir belaidžius tinklus, užšifravimą, ryšių protokolų užšifravimą, atsižvelgiant į patvirtinto duomenų klasifikavimo rezultatus, IRT rizikos vertinimo rezultatus ir 6 straipsnio 2 dalyje nurodytų tinklų ryšių užšifravimą;

f) 

tinklų projektavimą pagal finansų sektoriaus subjekto nustatytus IRT saugumo reikalavimus, atsižvelgiant į pažangiausią praktiką, kad būtų užtikrintas tinklo konfidencialumas, vientisumas ir prieinamumas;

g) 

tinklo duomenų srauto tarp vidaus tinklų ir interneto bei kitų išorės jungčių saugumo užtikrinimą;

h) 

užkardos taisyklių ir ryšių filtrų nustatymo, įgyvendinimo, patvirtinimo, pakeitimo ir peržiūros vaidmenų, pareigų ir etapų nustatymą;

i) 

tinklo architektūros ir tinklo saugumo projekto peržiūrų atlikimą kartą per metus, o labai mažų įmonių – reguliariais intervalais, siekiant identifikuoti galimus pažeidžiamumus;

j) 

priemones potinkliams ir tinklo komponentams bei įrenginiams prireikus laikinai izoliuoti;

k) 

visų tinklo komponentų saugios bazinės konfigūracijos įgyvendinimą ir tinklo bei tinklo įrenginių atsparumo didinimą pagal pardavėjo nurodymus, taikytinus standartus, apibrėžtus Reglamento (ES) Nr. 1025/2012 2 straipsnio 1 punkte, ir pažangiausią praktiką;

l) 

procedūras, pagal kurias po nurodyto neaktyvumo laikotarpio sistemos ir nuotoliniai seansai apribojami, užrakinami ir nutraukiami;

m) 

dėl tinklo paslaugų susitarimų:

i) 

IRT ir informacijos saugumo priemonių, paslaugų lygių ir valdymo reikalavimų, taikomų visoms tinklo paslaugoms, nustatymą ir specifikacijas;

ii) 

tai, ar tas paslaugas tiekia grupės vidaus IRT paslaugų teikėjas, ar IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalys.

Taikydami h punktą, finansų sektoriaus subjektai reguliariai peržiūri užkardos taisykles ir ryšių filtrus pagal susijusių IRT sistemų klasifikaciją pagal Reglamento (ES) 2022/2554 8 straipsnio 1 dalį ir bendrą IRT turto rizikos profilį. Finansų sektoriaus subjektai tikrina IRT sistemoms, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, taikomų užkardos taisyklių ir ryšių filtrų tinkamumą bent kas šešis mėnesius.
EULAW 28 straipsnis Bendrieji principai
-
EULAW 29 straipsnis Išankstinis IRT koncentracijos rizikos vertinimas subjektų lygmeniu
-
EULAW 30 straipsnis Pagrindinės sutartinės nuostatos
-
EULAW 21 straipsnis Kibernetinio saugumo rizikos valdymo priemonės
-
EULAW 28 straipsnis Bendrieji principai
-
EULAW 29 straipsnis Išankstinis IRT koncentracijos rizikos vertinimas subjektų lygmeniu
-
EULAW 30 straipsnis Pagrindinės sutartinės nuostatos
-
EULAW 21 straipsnis Kibernetinio saugumo rizikos valdymo priemonės
-
EULAW 28 straipsnis Bendrieji principai
-
EULAW 29 straipsnis Išankstinis IRT koncentracijos rizikos vertinimas subjektų lygmeniu
-
EULAW 30 straipsnis Pagrindinės sutartinės nuostatos
-
EULAW 21 straipsnis Kibernetinio saugumo rizikos valdymo priemonės
-
EULAW 28 straipsnis 1

1.   Finansų sektoriaus subjektai valdo trečiosios šalies keliamą IRT riziką kaip neatsiejamą IRT rizikos komponentą pagal savo IRT rizikos valdymo sistemą, kaip nurodyta 6 straipsnio 1 dalyje, laikydamiesi šių principų:

a)

finansų sektoriaus subjektai, kurie yra sudarę sutartimi įformintus susitarimus dėl IRT paslaugų naudojimo savo veiklos operacijoms vykdyti, visada išlieka visiškai atsakingi už visų šiame reglamente ir taikytinoje finansinių paslaugų teisėje nustatytų pareigų laikymąsi ir vykdymą;

b)

finansų sektoriaus subjektai, valdydami trečiosios šalies keliamą IRT riziką, vadovaujasi proporcingumo principu, atsižvelgdami į:

i)

su IRT susijusios priklausomybės pobūdį, mastą, sudėtingumą ir svarbą,

ii)

riziką, kylančią dėl sutartimi įformintų susitarimų dėl IRT paslaugų naudojimo, sudarytų su IRT paslaugas teikiančiomis trečiosiomis šalimis, atsižvelgiant į atitinkamos paslaugos, proceso ar funkcijos ypatingą svarbą arba svarbumą, taip pat į galimą poveikį finansinių paslaugų ir veiklos tęstinumui ir prieinamumui individualiu ir grupės lygmenimis.
EULAW 29 straipsnis 2

2.   Jei sutartimi įformintame susitarime dėl IRT paslaugų, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, naudojimo yra numatyta galimybė IRT paslaugas teikiančiai trečiajai šaliai papildomai sudaryti subrangos sutartis dėl IRT paslaugų, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, su kitomis IRT paslaugas teikiančiomis trečiosiomis šalimis, finansų sektoriaus subjektai įvertina naudą ir riziką, galinčias atsirasti dėl tokių subrangos sutarčių, visų pirma tuo atveju, kai IRT subrangovas yra įsisteigęs trečiojoje valstybėje.

Kai sutartimi įforminti susitarimai susiję su IRT paslaugomis, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, finansų sektoriaus subjektai deramai apsvarsto nemokumo teisės nuostatas, kurios būtų taikomos IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies bankroto atveju, taip pat visus apribojimus, kurių galėtų atsirasti skubaus finansų sektoriaus subjekto duomenų atkūrimo atžvilgiu.

Jei sutartimi įforminti susitarimai dėl IRT paslaugų, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, naudojimo sudaromi su IRT paslaugas teikiančia trečiąja šalimi, įsisteigusia trečiojoje valstybėje, finansų sektoriaus subjektai, be antroje pastraipoje nurodytų aspektų, taip pat atsižvelgia į tai, ar laikomasi Sąjungos duomenų apsaugos taisyklių ir ar veiksmingai užtikrinamas teisės aktų vykdymas toje trečiojoje valstybėje.

Jei sutartimi įforminti susitarimai dėl IRT paslaugų, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, naudojimo numato galimybę sudaryti subrangos susitarimus, finansų sektoriaus subjektai įvertina, ar ir kaip galimai ilgos ar sudėtingos subrangos grandinės gali daryti poveikį jų galimybėms visapusiškai stebėti pagal sutartį perduotas funkcijas ir kompetentingos institucijos galimybėms šiuo atžvilgiu veiksmingai prižiūrėti finansų sektoriaus subjektą.
EULAW 30 straipsnis 1

1.   Finansų sektoriaus subjekto ir IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies teisės ir pareigos aiškiai paskirstomos ir išdėstomos raštu. Visa sutartis turi apimti paslaugų lygio susitarimus ir yra išdėstoma viename rašytiniame dokumente, kuris šalims yra prieinamas popierine forma, arba dokumente, kurį galima gauti kita atsisiunčiama, patvaria ir prieinama forma.
EULAW 30 straipsnis 2

2.   Sutartimi įformintuose susitarimuose dėl IRT paslaugų naudojimo turi būti nurodyti bent šie elementai:

a)

aiškus ir išsamus visų funkcijų ir IRT paslaugų, kurias turi teikti IRT paslaugas teikianti trečioji šalis, aprašymas, nurodant, ar leidžiama sudaryti subrangos sutartis IRT paslaugoms, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, ar jos esminių dalių ir, jeigu taip, tokiai subrangos sutarčiai taikomos sąlygos;

b)

vietos, t. y. regionai ar šalys, kuriuose turi būti teikiamos pagal sutartį arba subrangos sutartį atliekamos funkcijos ir IRT paslaugos ir kuriuose turi būti tvarkomi duomenys, nurodant saugojimo vietą, ir reikalavimas, kad IRT paslaugas teikianti trečioji šalis iš anksto praneštų finansų sektoriaus subjektui, jeigu ji ketina keisti tokias vietas;

c)

nuostatos dėl duomenų prieinamumo, autentiškumo, vientisumo ir konfidencialumo, kiek tai susiję su duomenų, įskaitant asmens duomenis, apsauga;

d)

nuostatos dėl prieigos prie asmens ir ne asmens duomenų, kuriuos tvarko finansų sektoriaus subjektas, jų atkūrimo ir grąžinimo lengvai prieinama forma užtikrinimo IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies nemokumo, pertvarkymo ar veiklos operacijų nutraukimo atveju arba sutartimi įforminto susitarimo nutraukimo atveju;

e)

paslaugų lygio aprašymai, įskaitant jų atnaujinimus ir pataisymus;

f)

IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies pareiga teikti pagalbą finansų sektoriaus subjektui be papildomo mokesčio arba už iš anksto nustatytą mokestį, kai įvyksta IRT incidentas, susijęs su finansų sektoriaus subjektui teikiama IRT paslauga;

g)

IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies pareiga visapusiškai bendradarbiauti su kompetentingomis institucijomis ir finansų sektoriaus subjekto pertvarkymo institucijomis, įskaitant su jų paskirtais asmenimis;

h)

sutarties nutraukimo teisės ir susiję minimalūs įspėjimo apie sutartimi įformintų susitarimų nutraukimą terminai, atsižvelgiant į kompetentingų institucijų ir pertvarkymo institucijų lūkesčius;

i)

IRT paslaugas teikiančių trečiųjų šalių dalyvavimo finansų sektoriaus subjektų informuotumo apie IRT saugumą programose ir skaitmeninės veiklos atsparumo mokymuose pagal 13 straipsnio 6 dalį sąlygos.
EULAW 30 straipsnis 3

3.   Į sutartimi įformintus susitarimus dėl IRT paslaugų, kuriomis palaikomos ypatingos svarbos arba svarbios funkcijos, naudojimo, be 2 dalyje nurodytų elementų, įtraukiami bent šie elementai:

a)

išsamūs paslaugų lygio aprašymai, įskaitant jų atnaujinimus ir pataisymus, ir tikslūs kiekybiniai ir kokybiniai sutarto paslaugų lygio tiksliniai veiklos rezultatų rodikliai, kad finansų sektoriaus subjektas galėtų vykdyti veiksmingą IRT paslaugų stebėseną ir nepagrįstai nedelsdamas imtis tinkamų taisomųjų veiksmų, kai sutarti paslaugų lygiai neužtikrinami;

b)

IRT paslaugas teikiančiai trečiajai šaliai taikomi įspėjimo terminai ir pareigos teikti pranešimus finansų sektoriaus subjektui, įskaitant pranešimą apie bet kokius pokyčius, kurie gali daryti reikšmingą poveikį IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies galimybėms veiksmingai teikti IRT paslaugas, kurios palaiko ypatingos svarbos arba svarbias funkcijas pagal sutartus paslaugų lygius;

c)

reikalavimai IRT paslaugas teikiančiai trečiajai šaliai įgyvendinti ir testuoti nenumatytų veiklos atvejų planus ir taikyti IRT saugumo priemones ir politiką, kuriomis užtikrinamas tinkamas finansų sektoriaus subjekto teikiamų paslaugų saugumo lygis laikantis jo taikomos reguliavimo sistemos;

d)

IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies pareiga dalyvauti ir visapusiškai bendradarbiauti finansų sektoriaus subjekto TLPT, kaip nurodyta 26 ir 27 straipsniuose;

e)

teisė nuolat stebėti IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies veiklos rezultatus; ši teisė apima:

i)

finansų sektoriaus subjekto arba paskirtos trečiosios šalies ir kompetentingos institucijos neribotas teises turėti prieigą, atlikti patikrinimą bei auditą ir teisę daryti atitinkamų dokumentų kopijas vietoje, jeigu jie turi ypatingos svarbos IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies operacijoms; veiksmingai naudotis šiomis teisėmis netrukdo ir jų nevaržo kiti sutartimi įforminti susitarimai arba įgyvendinimo politika;

ii)

teisę susitarti dėl alternatyvių saugumo užtikrinimo lygių, jei tai turi įtakos kitų klientų teisėms;

iii)

IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies pareigą visapusiškai bendradarbiauti kompetentingoms institucijoms, atsakingajai priežiūros institucijai, finansų sektoriaus subjektui arba paskirtai trečiajai šaliai atliekant patikrinimus ir auditus ir

iv)

pareigą pateikti išsamią informaciją apie tokių patikrinimų ir auditų apimtį, procedūras, kurių turi būti laikomasi jų metu, ir jų dažnumą;

f)

pasitraukimo strategijos, visų pirma privalomo pakankamos trukmės pereinamojo laikotarpio nustatymas:

i)

per kurį IRT paslaugas teikianti trečioji šalis toliau vykdys atitinkamas funkcijas ar teiks IRT paslaugas, kad būtų sumažinta finansų sektoriaus subjekto veiklos sutrikdymo rizika arba užtikrintas veiksmingas jo pertvarkymas ir restruktūrizavimas;

ii)

per kurį finansų sektoriaus subjektas gali pereiti prie kitos IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies arba pasirinkti viduje taikomus sprendimus, atitinkančius teikiamos paslaugos sudėtingumą.

Nukrypstant nuo e punkto, IRT paslaugas teikianti trečioji šalis ir finansų sektoriaus subjektas, kuris yra labai maža įmonė, gali susitarti, kad prieigos, patikrinimo ir audito teisės gali būti perduotos IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies paskirtai nepriklausomai trečiajai šaliai ir kad finansų sektoriaus subjektas bet kuriuo metu gali prašyti tos trečiosios šalies pateikti informaciją ir patikinimą apie IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalies veiklos rezultatus.
EULAW 30 straipsnis 4

4.   Derėdamiesi dėl sutartimi įformintų susitarimų, finansų sektoriaus subjektai ir IRT paslaugas teikiančios trečiosios šalys apsvarsto galimybę taikyti standartines sutarčių sąlygas, valdžios institucijų parengtas konkrečioms paslaugoms.

Susietos užduotys

Saitai
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
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 Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
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
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
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
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
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
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
is blocked by TPM-14 Third-Party Contract Requirements – Assessment Procedure
blocks SR-03(03) Sub-tier Flow Down
blocks 03.01.20 Use of External Systems
blocks 03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel
blocks 03.16.03 External System Services
blocks 03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods
blocks 03.17.03 Supply Chain Requirements and Processes
blocks GV.OC-02 Internal and external stakeholders are understood, and their needs and expectations regarding cybersecurity risk management are understood and …
blocks GV.OC-03 Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements regarding cybersecurity - including privacy and civil liberties obligations - are understood and …
blocks GV.SC-02 Cybersecurity roles and responsibilities for suppliers, customers, and partners are established, communicated, and coordinated internally and …
blocks GV.SC-05 Requirements to address cybersecurity risks in supply chains are established, prioritized, and integrated into contracts and other types of …
blocks GV.SC-06 Planning and due diligence are performed to reduce risks before entering into formal supplier or other third-party relationships
blocks PO.1 Define Security Requirements for Software Development
  • 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.