+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. Ħarsa ġenerali

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 Referenzi

1.2 Rekwiżiti identifikati

1.3 Regolamenti relatati

2. Rekwiżiti identifikati

Rekwiżiti

3. Regolamenti relatati

Regolamenti
EULAW Artikolu 11 Sigurtà tad-datau tas-sistema
-
EULAW Artikolu 13 Ġestjoni tas-sigurtà tan-network

Artikolu 13

Ġestjoni tas-sigurtà tan-network

L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom, bħala parti mis-salvagwardji li jiżguraw is-sigurtà tan-networks kontra l-intrużjonijiet u l-użu ħażin tad-data, jiżviluppaw, jiddokumentaw u jimplimentaw politiki, proċeduri, protokolli u għodod dwar il-ġestjoni tas-sigurtà tan-network, inklużi dawn kollha li ġejjin:

(a) 

is-segregazzjoni u s-segmentazzjoni tas-sistemi u tan-networks tal-ICT filwaqt li jitqiesu:

(i) 

il-kritikalità jew l-importanza tal-funzjoni li jappoġġaw dawk is-sistemi u n-networks tal-ICT;

(ii) 

il-klassifikazzjoni stabbilita f’konformità mal-Artikolu 8(1) tar-Regolament (UE) 2022/2554;

(iii) 

il-profil tar-riskju kumplessiv tal-assi tal-ICT bl-użu ta’ dawk is-sistemi u networks;

(b) 

id-dokumentazzjoni tal-konnessjonijiet tan-network u l-flussi tad-data kollha tal-entità finanzjarja;

(c) 

l-użu ta’ network separat u ddedikat għall-amministrazzjoni tal-assi tal-ICT;

(d) 

l-identifikazzjoni u l-implimentazzjoni ta’ kontrolli tal-aċċess għan-network biex jiġu evitati u identifikati konnessjonijiet man-network tal-entità finanzjarja minn kwalunkwe apparat jew sistema mhux awtorizzati, jew kwalunkwe punt tat-tmiem li ma jissodisfax ir-rekwiżiti ta’ sigurtà tal-entità finanzjarja;

(e) 

il-kriptaġġ tal-konnessjonijiet tan-network li jgħaddu minn fuq in-networks korporattivi, in-networks pubbliċi, in-networks domestiċi, in-networks ta’ partijiet terzi, u n-networks mingħajr fili, għall-protokolli ta’ komunikazzjoni użati, filwaqt li jitqiesu r-riżultati tal-klassifikazzjoni tad-data approvata, ir-riżultati tal-valutazzjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT u l-kriptaġġ tal-konnessjonijiet tan-network imsemmija fl-Artikolu 6(2);

(f) 

id-disinn ta’ networks f’konformità mar-rekwiżiti tas-sigurtà tal-ICT stabbiliti mill-entità finanzjarja, filwaqt li jitqiesu l-prattiki ewlenin biex jiġu żgurati l-kunfidenzjalità, l-integrità u d-disponibbiltà tan-network;

(g) 

l-iżgurar tat-traffiku tan-network bejn in-networks interni u l-Internet u konnessjonijiet esterni oħrajn;

(h) 

l-identifikazzjoni tar-rwoli u tar-responsabbiltajiet u tal-passi għall-ispeċifikazzjoni, għall-implimentazzjoni, għall-approvazzjoni, għat-tibdil u għar-rieżami tar-regoli dwar il-firewalls u tal-filtri tal-konnessjonijiet;

(i) 

il-prestazzjoni tar-rieżamijiet tal-arkitettura tan-network u tad-disinn tas-sigurtà tan-network darba fis-sena, u perjodikament għall-mikrointrapriżi, biex jiġu identifikati l-vulnerabbiltajiet potenzjali;

(j) 

il-miżuri biex jiġu iżolati temporanjament, meta meħtieġ, is-subnetworks, u l-komponenti u l-apparati tan-network;

(k) 

l-implimentazzjoni ta’ linja bażi ta’ konfigurazzjoni sigura tal-komponenti kollha tan-network, u t-twebbis tan-network u tal-apparati tan-network f’konformità ma’ kwalunkwe struzzjoni tal-bejjiegħ, u, meta applikabbli, standards, kif iddefiniti fl-Artikolu 2, il-punt (1) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1025/2012, u prattiki ewlenin;

(l) 

il-proċeduri biex jiġu llimitati, imblokkati u tterminati s-sistema u s-sessjonijiet mill-bogħod wara perjodu speċifikat ta’ inattività;

(m) 

għall-ftehimiet dwar is-servizzi tan-network:

(i) 

l-identifikazzjoni u l-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-miżuri tas-sigurtà tal-ICT u tal-informazzjoni, tal-livelli ta’ servizz u tar-rekwiżiti ta’ ġestjoni tas-servizzi kollha tan-network;

(ii) 

jekk dawk is-servizzi humiex ipprovduti minn fornitur ta’ servizzi intragrupp tal-ICT jew minn fornituri terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT.

Għall-finijiet tal-punt (h), l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom iwettqu r-rieżami tar-regoli dwar il-firewall u tal-filtri tal-konnessjonijiet fuq bażi regolari f’konformità mal-klassifikazzjoni stabbilita f’konformità mal-Artikolu 8(1) tar-Regolament (UE) 2022/2554 u mal-profil tar-riskju ġenerali tas-sistemi tal-ICT involuti. Għas-sistemi tal-ICT li jappoġġaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti, l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jivverifikaw l-adegwatezza tar-regoli eżistenti dwar il-firewall u l-filtri ta’ konnessjoni mill-anqas kull 6 xhur.
EULAW Artikolu 28 Prinċipji ġenerali
-
EULAW Artikolu 29 Valutazzjoni preliminari tar-riskju ta’ konċentrazzjoni tal-ICT fil-livell ta’ entità
-
EULAW Artikolu 30 Dispożizzjonijiet kuntrattwali ewlenin
-
EULAW Artikolu 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
EULAW Artikolu 28 Prinċipji ġenerali
-
EULAW Artikolu 29 Valutazzjoni preliminari tar-riskju ta’ konċentrazzjoni tal-ICT fil-livell ta’ entità
-
EULAW Artikolu 30 Dispożizzjonijiet kuntrattwali ewlenin
-
EULAW Artikolu 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
EULAW Artikolu 28 Prinċipji ġenerali
-
EULAW Artikolu 29 Valutazzjoni preliminari tar-riskju ta’ konċentrazzjoni tal-ICT fil-livell ta’ entità
-
EULAW Artikolu 30 Dispożizzjonijiet kuntrattwali ewlenin
-
EULAW Artikolu 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
EULAW Artikolu 28 1

1.   L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jimmaniġġaw ir-riskju relatat mal-ICT minn partijiet terzi bħala komponent integrali tar-riskju tal-ICT fil-qafas tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT tagħhom kif imsemmi fl-Artikolu 6(1), u f’konformità mal-prinċipji li ġejjin:

(a)

l-entitajiet finanzjarji li għandhom fis-seħħ arranġamenti kuntrattwali għall-użu tas-servizzi tal-ICT biex iwettqu l-operat tagħhom għandhom, f’kull ħin, jibqgħu kompletament responsabbli għall-konformità mal-obbligi kollha u jwettquhom, skont dan ir-Regolament u l-liġi applikabbli dwar is-servizzi finanzjarji;

(b)

il-ġestjoni mill-entitajiet finanzjarji tar-riskju relatat mal-ICT minn partijiet terzi għandha tiġi implimentata fid-dawl tal-prinċipju tal-proporzjonalità, filwaqt li jitqiesu:

(i)

in-natura, l-iskala, il-kumplessità u l-importanza tad-dipendenzi relatati mal-ICT,

(ii)

ir-riskji li jirriżultaw minn arranġamenti kuntrattwali dwar l-użu ta’ servizzi tal-ICT konklużi ma’ fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, b’kont meħud tal-kritikalità jew tal-importanza tas-servizz, il-proċess jew il-funzjoni rispettivi, u l-impatt potenzjali fuq il-kontinwità u fuq id-disponibbiltà tas-servizzi u l-attivitajiet finanzjarji, fil-livell individwali u fil-livell ta’ grupp.
EULAW Artikolu 29 2

2.   Meta l-arranġamenti kuntrattwali dwar l-użu tas-servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti jinkludu l-possibbiltà li fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT ikompli jissottokuntratta servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjoni kritika jew importanti lil fornituri terzi oħra ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jiżnu l-benefiċċji u r-riskji li jistgħu jinħolqu b’rabta ma’ tali sottokuntrattar, b’mod partikolari fil-każ ta’ sottokuntrattur tal-ICT stabbilit f’pajjiż terz.

Fejn l-arranġamenti kuntrattwali jikkonċernaw servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti, l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom iqisu kif xieraq id-dispożizzjonijiet fil-liġi dwar l-insolvenza li japplikaw fil-każ tal-falliment ta’ fornitur terz ta’ servizz tal-ICT kif ukoll kwalunkwe limitazzjoni li tista’ tinħoloq fir-rigward tal-irkupru urġenti tad-data tal-entità finanzjarja.

Meta jiġu konklużi arranġamenti kuntrattwali dwar l-użu ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti ma’ fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT stabbilit f’pajjiż terz, l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom, apparti l-kunsiderazzjonijiet msemmija fit-tieni subparagrafu, iqisu wkoll il-konformità mar-regoli tal-Unjoni dwar il-protezzjoni tad-data u l-infurzar effettiv tal-liġi f’dak il-pajjiż terz.

Fejn l-arranġamenti kuntrattwali dwar l-użu tas-servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti jipprevedu s-sottokuntrattar, l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jivvalutaw jekk il-ktajjen potenzjalment twal jew kumplessi ta’ sottokuntrattar jistax ikollhom impatt, u kif jistgħu jħallu dan l-impatt, fuq il-kapaċità tagħhom li jimmonitorjaw bis-sħiħ il-funzjonijiet ikkuntrattati u l-kapaċità tal-awtorità kompetenti li twettaq superviżjoni b’mod effettiv fuq l-entità finanzjarja f’dak ir-rigward.
EULAW Artikolu 30 1

1.   Id-drittijiet u l-obbligi tal-entità finanzjarja u tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT għandhom jiġu allokati b’mod ċar bil-miktub. Il-kuntratt sħiħ għandu jinkludi l-ftehimiet dwar il-livell ta’ servizz u għandu jiġi ddokumentat f’dokument bil-miktub wieħed li għandu jkun disponibbli għall-partijiet fuq karta, jew f’dokument f’format ieħor li jista’ jitniżżel u jkun durabbli u aċċessibbli.
EULAW Artikolu 30 2

2.   L-arranġamenti kuntrattwali dwar l-użu ta’ servizzi tal-ICT għandhom jinkludu mill-inqas l-elementi li ġejjin:

(a)

deskrizzjoni ċara u kompleta tal-funzjonijiet u s-servizzi kollha tal-ICT li għandhom jiġu pprovduti mill-fornitur terz ta’ servizz tal-ICT, li tindika jekk huwiex permess is-sottokuntrattar ta’ servizz tal-ICT li jappoġġja funzjoni kritika jew importanti, jew partijiet materjali tiegħu u, f’dak il-każ, il-kondizzjonijiet li japplikaw għal tali sottokuntrattar;

(b)

il-postijiet, jiġifieri r-reġjuni u l-pajjiżi, fejn iridu jiġu pprovduti l-funzjonijiet u s-servizzi tal-ICT kuntrattati jew sottokuntrattati u fejn id-data trid tiġi pproċessata, inkluż fejn ser jinħażnu, u r-rekwiżit li l-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT jinnotifika lill-entità finanzjarja minn qabel jekk ikun biħsiebu jibdel il-postijiet tal-ħażna;

(c)

dispożizzjonijiet dwar id-disponibbiltà, l-awtentiċità, l-integrità u l-kunfidenzjalità fir-rigward tal-protezzjoni tad-data, inkluż id-data personali;

(d)

dispożizzjonijiet dwar l-iżgurar tal-aċċess, l-irkupru u r-ritorn f’format faċilment aċċessibbli tad-data personali u mhux personali pproċessata mill-entità finanzjarja fil-każ tal-insolvenza, ir-riżoluzzjoni jew il-waqfien tal-operat tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, jew fil-każ tat-terminazzjoni tal-arranġamenti kuntrattwali;

(e)

deskrizzjonijiet tal-livell ta’ servizz, inkluż aġġornamenti u reviżjonijiet tiegħu[…]

(f)

l-obbligu tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jipprovdi assistenza lill-entità finanzjarja mingħajr kost addizzjonali, jew b’kost li jiġi ddeterminat ex ante, meta jseħħ inċident tal-ICT li jkun relatat mas-servizz tal-ICT ipprovdut lill-entità finanzjarja;

(g)

l-obbligu tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jikkoopera bis-sħiħ mal-awtoritajiet kompetenti u l-awtoritajiet ta’ riżoluzzjoni tal-entità finanzjarja, inklużi persuni maħtura minnhom;

(h)

id-drittijiet ta’ terminazzjoni u l-perjodi minimi ta’ avviż għat-terminazzjoni tal-arranġamenti kuntrattwali, f’konformità mal-aspettattivi tal-awtoritajiet kompetenti u l-awtoritajiet ta’ riżoluzzjoni;

(i)

il-kondizzjonijiet għall-parteċipazzjoni ta’ fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT fil-programmi ta’ sensibilizzazzjoni dwar is-sigurtà tal-ICT tal-entitajiet finanzjarji u fis-sessjonijiet ta’-taħriġ dwar ir-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali f’konformità mal-Artikolu 13(6).
EULAW Artikolu 30 3

3.   L-arranġamenti kuntrattwali għall-użu ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti għandhom, minbarra l-elementi msemmija fil-paragrafu 2, jinkludu tal-inqas dan li ġej:

(a)

deskrizzjonijiet sħaħ tal-livell tas-servizz, inkluż aġġornamenti u r-reviżjonijiet tagħhom b’miri tal-prestazzjoni kwantitattivi u kwalitattivi preċiżi fil-limiti tal-livelli tas-servizz miftiehma biex jippermettu monitoraġġ effettiv mill-entità finanzjarja tas-servizzi tal-ICT u jippermettu t-teħid ta’ azzjonijiet korrettivi xierqa, mingħajr dewmien żejjed, meta l-livelli tas-servizz miftiehma ma jintlaħqux;

(b)

il-perjodi ta’ avviż u l-obbligi ta’ rappurtar tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT lill-entità finanzjarja, inkluż in-notifika ta’ kwalunkwe żvilupp li jista’ jkollu impatt materjali fuq il-kapaċità tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jipprovdi s-servizzi tal-ICT li jappoġġjaw funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti b’mod effettiv f’konformità mal-livelli tas-servizz miftiehma;

(c)

rekwiżiti għall-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT biex jimplimenta u jittestja pjanijiet ta’ kontinġenza tan-negozju u biex ikollu fis-seħħ miżuri, għodod u politiki ta’ sigurtà tal-ICT li jipprovdu livell xieraq ta’ sigurtà biex l-entità finanzjarja tipprovdi s-servizzi tagħha skont il-qafas regolatorju tagħha;

(d)

l-obbligu tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jipparteċipa u jikkoopera bis-sħiħ fit-TLPT tal-entità finanzjarja kif imsemmi fl-Artikoli 26 u 27;

(e)

id-dritt ta’ monitoraġġ, fuq bażi kontinwa, tal-prestazzjoni tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, li jinvolvi dan li ġej:

(i)

id-drittijiet mingħajr restrizzjonijiet ta’ aċċess, spezzjoni u awditjar mill-entità finanzjarja, jew parti terza ddeżinjata, u mill-awtorità kompetenti, u d-dritt li jittieħdu kopji tad-dokumentazzjoni rilevanti fuq il-post jekk ikunu kritiċi għall-operazzjonijiet tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, li l-eżerċizzju effettiv tagħhom mhuwiex imfixkel jew limitat minn arranġamenti kuntrattwali jew politiki ta’ implimentazzjoni oħrajn;

(ii)

id-dritt li jintlaħaq qbil fuq il-livelli alternattivi ta’ aċċertament jekk jiġu affettwati d-drittijiet ta’ klijenti oħra;

(iii)

l-obbligu tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT li jikkoopera bis-sħiħ matul l-ispezzjonijiet u l-awditi fuq il-post imwettqa mill-awtoritajiet kompetenti, mis-Sorveljant Ewlieni, mill-entità finanzjarja jew minn parti terza maħtura; u

(iv)

l-obbligu li jiġu pprovduti d-dettalji dwar l-ambitu, il-proċeduri li għandhom jiġu segwiti u l-frekwenza ta’ tali spezzjonijiet u awditi;

(f)

strateġiji ta’ ħruġ, b’mod partikolari l-istabbiliment ta’ perjodu ta’ tranżizzjoni adegwat obbligatorju:

(i)

li matulu l-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT ikompli jipprovdi l-funzjonijiet, jew is-servizzi tal-ICT rispettivi, bil-ħsieb li jitnaqqas ir-riskju ta’ tfixkil fl-entità finanzjarja jew biex jiġu żgurati r-riżoluzzjoni u r-ristrutturar effettivi tagħha;

(ii)

li jippermetti lill-entità finanzjarja temigra lejn fornitur terz ieħor ta’ servizzi tal-ICT jew taqleb għal soluzzjonijiet interni konsistenti mal-kumplessità tas-servizz ipprovdut.

Permezz ta’ deroga mill-punt (e), il-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT u l-entità finanzjarja li tkun mikrointrapriża jistgħu jaqblu li d-drittijiet tal-entità finanzjarja ta’ aċċess, spezzjoni u awditjar jistgħu jiġu ddelegati lil parti terza indipendenti, maħtura mill-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, u li l-entità finanzjarja tista’ titlob informazzjoni u aċċertament fuq il-prestazzjoni tal-fornitur terz ta’ servizzi tal-ICT mill-parti terza fi kwalunkwe ħin.
EULAW Artikolu 30 4

4.   Meta jinnegozjaw arranġamenti kuntrattwali, l-entitajiet finanzjarji u l-fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT għandhom jikkunsidraw l-użu ta’ klawżoli kuntrattwali standard żviluppati minn awtoritajiet pubbliċi għal servizzi speċifiċi.

Kwistjonijiet marbuta

Links
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.