+Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
---+System Administrative Processes
---+Database Administrative Processes
|
Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
Description
Mechanisms exist to identify and document Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), or similar documentation, to enable the proper execution of day-to-day / assigned tasks.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
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
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Security operations management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Security operations management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the organization's TAASD.
Level 3 Well Defined
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain OPS domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of security operations management (e.g., SIEM solution and EDR/XDR tools).
▪ 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 OPS 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).
▪ Cybersecurity personnel create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to identify and document Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), or similar documentation, to enable the proper execution of day-to-day / assigned tasks.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Security Operations (OPS) 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
| Pavadinimas |
Standartas |
|
System Administrative Processes
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to develop, implement and govern system administration processes, with corresponding Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), for operating and maintaining Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Documented Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP)
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity Standardized Operating Procedures (CSOP)
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
Asset Management (AST) 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 AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST 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 AST domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Asset 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.
▪ The IT department establishes, maintains and updates an inventory that contains a listing of all organizational-owned TAASD, at a minimum covering common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers).
Level 3 Well Defined
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain OPS domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of security operations management (e.g., SIEM solution and EDR/XDR tools).
▪ 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 OPS 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).
▪ Cybersecurity personnel create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to develop, implement and govern system administration processes, with corresponding Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), for operating and maintaining Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS).
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.
|
|
Database Administrative Processes
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to develop, implement and govern database management processes, with corresponding Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), for operating and maintaining databases.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Basic documented steps for database backups and administration
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Database administration procedures (backup, patching, access management)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Database management SOPs covering administration, patching, backup and access
∙ Database activity logging
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Formal database administration standards and SOPs
∙ Database Activity Monitoring (DAM)
∙ DBA access via PAM
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise database governance (SOPs, DAM, PAM, encryption, automated compliance checks)
∙ Database security posture 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
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
Asset Management (AST) 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 AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST 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 AST domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Asset 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.
▪ The IT department establishes, maintains and updates an inventory that contains a listing of all organizational-owned TAASD, at a minimum covering common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers).
▪ Databases containing sensitive/regulated data use a cryptographic mechanism to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information in the database (e.g., column-level and Transparent Data Encryption (TDE)).
Level 3 Well Defined
Security Operations (OPS) 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 OPS 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 OPS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain OPS domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of security operations management (e.g., SIEM solution and EDR/XDR tools).
▪ 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 OPS 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).
▪ Cybersecurity personnel create “run books,” or SOPs, to capture operational knowledge in documentation form for critical business functions and/or for sensitive/regulated obligations.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to develop, implement and govern database management processes, with corresponding Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP), for operating and maintaining databases.
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
| Šaltinis |
Reikalavimas |
3. Susiję teisės aktai
Teisės aktai
| Šaltinis |
Reguliavimas |
|
EULAW
|
8 straipsnis IRT operacijų politika ir procedūros
-
|
|
EULAW
|
8 straipsnis IRT operacijų politika ir procedūros
-
|
|
EULAW
|
9 straipsnis Pajėgumo ir veiklos rezultatų valdymas
-
|
|
EULAW
|
10 straipsnis Pažeidžiamumų ir pataisų valdymas
-
|
|
EULAW
|
10 straipsnis Pažeidžiamumų ir pataisų valdymas
-
|
|
EULAW
|
11 straipsnis Duomenų ir sistemų apsauga
-
|
|
EULAW
|
6 straipsnis IRT rizikos valdymo sistema
-
|
|
EULAW
|
9 straipsnis Apsauga ir prevencija
-
|
|
EULAW
|
6 straipsnis 2
2. IRT rizikos valdymo sistema apima bent strategijas, politiką, procedūras, IRT protokolus ir priemones, kurie yra būtini siekiant deramai ir tinkamai apsaugoti visą informacinį turtą ir IRT turtą, įskaitant kompiuterių programinę įrangą, aparatinę įrangą, serverius, taip pat apsaugoti visus atitinkamus fizinius komponentus ir infrastruktūras, tokius kaip patalpos, duomenų centrai ir jautrios specialios zonos, kad būtų užtikrinta, kad visas informacinis turtas ir IRT turtas būtų tinkamai apsaugotas nuo rizikos, įskaitant žalą ir neteisėtą prieigą ar naudojimą.
|
|
EULAW
|
9 straipsnis 2
2. Finansų sektoriaus subjektai rengia, įsigyja ir įgyvendina IRT saugumo politiką, procedūras, protokolus ir priemones, kuriais siekiama užtikrinti IRT sistemų, visų pirma palaikančių ypatingos svarbos arba svarbias funkcijas, atsparumą, tęstinumą ir prieinamumą, taip pat išlaikyti aukštus saugomų, naudojamų ar perduodamų duomenų prieinamumo, autentiškumo, vientisumo ir konfidencialumo standartus.
|
|
EULAW
|
9 straipsnis 4
4. Pagal 6 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodytą IRT rizikos valdymo sistemą finansų sektoriaus subjektai:
|
a)
|
parengia ir dokumentais pagrindžia informacijos saugumo politiką, kurioje apibrėžiamos taisyklės, kaip apsaugoti duomenų, informacinio turto ir IRT turto, įskaitant, kai taikytina, jų klientų duomenų, informacinio turto ir IRT turto prieinamumą, autentiškumą, vientisumą ir konfidencialumą;
|
|
b)
|
taikydami rizika grindžiamą požiūrį, nustato patikimą tinklų ir infrastruktūros valdymo struktūrą, naudodamiesi tinkamais būdais, metodais ir protokolais; tai gali apimti automatizuotų mechanizmų paveiktam informaciniam turtui izoliuoti kibernetinių išpuolių atveju įgyvendinimą;
|
|
c)
|
įgyvendina politikos priemones, kuriomis fizinė ar loginė prieiga prie informacinio turto ir IRT turto apribojama tuo, kas reikalinga tik teisėtoms ir patvirtintoms funkcijoms ir veiklai, ir tuo tikslu parengia politikos priemonių, procedūrų ir kontrolės priemonių rinkinį dėl prieigos teisių ir patikimo jų administravimo;
|
|
d)
|
įgyvendina griežtų tapatumo nustatymo mechanizmų politikos priemones ir protokolus, pagrįstus atitinkamais standartais, specialiomis kontrolės sistemomis ir apsaugos priemonėmis dėl kriptografinių raktų, kuriais duomenys užšifruojami remiantis patvirtintų duomenų klasifikavimo ir IRT rizikos vertinimo procesų rezultatais;
|
|
e)
|
įgyvendina dokumentais pagrįstą IRT pakeitimų, įskaitant programinės įrangos, aparatinės įrangos, aparatinės programinės įrangos komponentų, sistemos ar saugumo nustatymus, valdymo politiką, procedūras ir kontrolės priemones, grindžiamas rizikos vertinimo požiūriu ir sudarančias neatsiejamą finansų sektoriaus subjekto bendro pakeitimų valdymo proceso dalį, siekiant užtikrinti, kad visi IRT sistemų pakeitimai būtų registruojami, testuojami, vertinami, tvirtinami, įgyvendinami ir tikrinami kontroliuojamu būdu;
|
|
f)
|
turi turėti tinkamą ir išsamią dokumentais pagrįstą pataisų ir atnaujinimų politiką.
|
Pirmos pastraipos b punkto tikslais finansų sektoriaus subjektai tinklų ryšio infrastruktūrą kuria taip, kad būtų galimybė ją skubiai atjungti ar segmentuoti, siekiant kuo labiau sumažinti plintantį neigiamą poveikį ir užkirsti jam kelią, ypač tarpusavyje susijusių finansinių procesų atveju.
Pirmos pastraipos e punkto tikslais IRT pakeitimų valdymo procesas tvirtinamas atitinkamų tiesioginių vadovų ir nustatomi konkretūs protokolai.
|
Susietos užduotys
- 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.
|