+Data Protection

Data Protection

Description

Mechanisms exist to facilitate the implementation of data protection controls.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Logical Access Control (LAC)
∙ Physical Access Control (PAC)

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

∙ Logical Access Control (LAC)
∙ Physical Access Control (PAC)

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

∙ Logical Access Control (LAC)
∙ Physical Access Control (PAC)
∙ Data governance program

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

∙ Logical Access Control (LAC)
∙ Physical Access Control (PAC)
∙ Data governance program
∙ Chief Data Officer (CDO)

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

∙ Logical Access Control (LAC)
∙ Physical Access Control (PAC)
∙ Data governance program
∙ Chief Data Officer (CDO)

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

Data Classification & Handling (DCH) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with DCH domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Data management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ A basic data classification process exists to identify categories of sensitive/regulated data for compliance-related protection requirements.
▪ Data protection controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards) to classify, protect and dispose of systems and data, including storage media.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Data classification and handling-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Data classification and handling management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ A formalized data classification scheme exists to identify categories of data, based on protection requirements from applicable laws, regulations and/or contractual obligations.
▪ TAASD are categorized according to data classification and business criticality.
▪ Data classification and handling criteria govern requirements protect sensitive/regulated regardless of where it is stored, processed and/or transmitted.
▪ The data retention process is manual and IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to manage the process.

Level 3 Well Defined

Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain DCH domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data classification and handling operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ 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 DCH domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to facilitate the implementation of data protection controls.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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. Pārskats

1.1 Atsauces

1.2 Identificētās prasības

1.3 Saistītie tiesību akti

2. Identificētās prasības

Prasības

3. Saistītie tiesību akti

Tiesību akti
EULAW 17. pants Kvalitātes vadības sistēma
-
EULAW 8. pants Politika un procedūras attiecībā uz IKT darbībām
-
EULAW 11. pants Datu un sistēmu drošība
-
EULAW 11. pants Datu un sistēmu drošība
-
EULAW 35. pants Datu, sistēmu un tīkla drošība

35. pants

Datu, sistēmu un tīkla drošība

Regulas (ES) 2022/2554 16. panta 1. punktā minētās finanšu vienības kā daļu no savām sistēmām, protokoliem un rīkiem izstrādā un īsteno aizsardzības pasākumus, kas nodrošina tīklu aizsardzību pret ielaušanos un datu ļaunprātīgu izmantošanu un kas saglabā datu pieejamību, autentiskumu, integritāti un konfidencialitāti. Konkrētāk, finanšu vienības, ņemot vērā šīs regulas 30. panta 1. punktā minēto klasifikāciju, nosaka:

a) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai aizsargātu datus, kad tie tiek izmantoti, tiek nosūtīti vai tiek glabāti;

b) 

drošības pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu attiecībā uz tādas programmatūras, datu nesēju, sistēmu un galapunkta ierīču izmantošanu, kuras nosūta un glabā finanšu vienības datus;

c) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai novērstu un atklātu neatļautu pieslēgšanos finanšu vienības tīklam un aizsargātu tīkla datplūsmu starp finanšu vienības iekšējiem tīkliem un internetu un citiem ārējiem pieslēgumiem;

d) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai nodrošinātu datu pieejamību, autentiskumu, integritāti un konfidencialitāti, kad notiek nosūtīšana tīklā;

e) 

procesu to datu drošai dzēšanai, kas tiek turēti telpās vai tiek glabāti ārēji un ko finanšu vienībai vairs nav nepieciešams vākt vai glabāt;

f) 

procesu, lai droši utilizētu vai izņemtu no ekspluatācijas telpās esošās datu glabāšanas ierīces vai datu glabāšanas ierīces, kas tiek glabātas ārēji un kas satur konfidenciālu informāciju;

g) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai nodrošinātu, ka tāldarbs un privātu galapunkta ierīču izmantošana nelabvēlīgi neietekmē finanšu vienības spēju veikt tās kritiski svarīgās darbības pienācīgā, savlaicīgā un drošā veidā.
EULAW 35. pants Datu, sistēmu un tīkla drošība

35. pants

Datu, sistēmu un tīkla drošība

Regulas (ES) 2022/2554 16. panta 1. punktā minētās finanšu vienības kā daļu no savām sistēmām, protokoliem un rīkiem izstrādā un īsteno aizsardzības pasākumus, kas nodrošina tīklu aizsardzību pret ielaušanos un datu ļaunprātīgu izmantošanu un kas saglabā datu pieejamību, autentiskumu, integritāti un konfidencialitāti. Konkrētāk, finanšu vienības, ņemot vērā šīs regulas 30. panta 1. punktā minēto klasifikāciju, nosaka:

a) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai aizsargātu datus, kad tie tiek izmantoti, tiek nosūtīti vai tiek glabāti;

b) 

drošības pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu attiecībā uz tādas programmatūras, datu nesēju, sistēmu un galapunkta ierīču izmantošanu, kuras nosūta un glabā finanšu vienības datus;

c) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai novērstu un atklātu neatļautu pieslēgšanos finanšu vienības tīklam un aizsargātu tīkla datplūsmu starp finanšu vienības iekšējiem tīkliem un internetu un citiem ārējiem pieslēgumiem;

d) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai nodrošinātu datu pieejamību, autentiskumu, integritāti un konfidencialitāti, kad notiek nosūtīšana tīklā;

e) 

procesu to datu drošai dzēšanai, kas tiek turēti telpās vai tiek glabāti ārēji un ko finanšu vienībai vairs nav nepieciešams vākt vai glabāt;

f) 

procesu, lai droši utilizētu vai izņemtu no ekspluatācijas telpās esošās datu glabāšanas ierīces vai datu glabāšanas ierīces, kas tiek glabātas ārēji un kas satur konfidenciālu informāciju;

g) 

pasākumu identifikāciju un īstenošanu, lai nodrošinātu, ka tāldarbs un privātu galapunkta ierīču izmantošana nelabvēlīgi neietekmē finanšu vienības spēju veikt tās kritiski svarīgās darbības pienācīgā, savlaicīgā un drošā veidā.

Saistītie uzdevumi

Saites
is related to Semi-Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to Data
is related to Identify
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Revenue Loss
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Loss of Competitive Advantage
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Internal Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of internal controls
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks 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 Annual
is related to Govern
blocks Intellectual Property / Trade Secret Loss
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks AI Data Confidentiality / Integrity / Provenance Loss
blocks Long-Term Confidentiality Loss from Cryptographic Obsolescence
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Data / Service Availability
blocks Loss of Authenticity / Provenance
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 Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Physical Crime
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 Product Defect / Design Failure
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Harvest Now / Decrypt Later (HNDL)
blocks Cryptographic Compromise / Cryptanalytic Capability Advancement
blocks HR-07.01B
blocks OPS-11.01B
is blocked by DCH-02 Data Protection – Assessment Procedure
blocks MP-01 Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [L] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [M] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [H] Policy and Procedures
blocks MP-01 [P] Policy and Procedures
blocks 03.01.01 Account Management
blocks 03.08.01 Media Storage
blocks ID.AM-08 Systems, hardware, software, services, and data are managed throughout their life cycles
blocks PR.DS Data Security
blocks PR.DS-01 The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-at-rest are protected
blocks PR.DS-02 The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-transit are protected
blocks PR.DS-10 The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected
  • 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.