+Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP)
|
Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP)
Description
Mechanisms exist to facilitate the design, implementation, and monitoring of security, compliance and resilience governance controls.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ SCFConnect (https://scfconnect.com) ∙ NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 (https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ SCFConnect (https://scfconnect.com) ∙ NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 (https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Steering committee ∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ ComplianceForge - Cybersecurity & Data Protection Program (CDPP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ GRC platform (e.g., OneTrust, ServiceNow GRC, LogicGate) ∙ Secure Controls Framework (SCF), NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and/or ISO 27001:2022 alignment
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Steering committee ∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.) ∙ Secure Controls Framework (SCF), NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and/or ISO 27001:2022 alignment
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Steering committee ∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com) ∙ Enterprise GRC platform (e.g., Cyturus, Archer, MetricStream, ServiceNow IRM) ∙ Secure Controls Framework (SCF), NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and/or ISO 27001:2022 alignment
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
Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with GOV domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Governance-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Cybersecurity and data protection governance is informally assigned as an additional duty to existing IT/cybersecurity personnel. ▪ Basic procedures are established for important tasks, but are ad hoc and not formally documented. ▪ The responsibility for developing and operating cybersecurity and data privacy procedures are up to the business process owner(s) to determine, including the definition and enforcement of roles and responsibilities. ▪ Governance documentation is made available to internal personnel (e.g., policies, standards and procedures). ▪ IT /cyber engineering governance is decentralized, with the responsibility for implementing and testing cybersecurity and data protection controls being assigned to the business process owner(s), including the definition and enforcement of roles and responsibilities.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Governance-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel ensure cybersecurity policies and standards are aligned with a leading cybersecurity framework (e.g., SCF, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, ISO 27002 or NIST Cybersecurity Framework). ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to implement and manage the organization's internal control system. ▪ Legal representation is consulted on an as-needed basis.
Level 3 Well Defined
Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain GOV 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). ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to facilitate the implementation of security, compliance and resilience governance controls.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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
1.1 Referenzi
1.2 Rekwiżiti identifikati
1.3 Regolamenti relatati
2. Rekwiżiti identifikati
3. Regolamenti relatati
Regolamenti
| Sors |
Regolamentazzjoni |
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 6 2
2. Il-qafas għall-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT għandu jinkludi tal-anqas l-istrateġiji, il-politiki, il-proċeduri, il-protokolli tal-ICT u l-għodod li huma meħtieġa biex b’mod debitu u adegwat jiġu protetti l-assi kollha ta’ informazzjoni u l-assi kollha tal-ICT, fosthom is-software tal-kompjuters, il-hardware u s-servers, kif ukoll biex jiġu protetti l-komponenti fiżiċi u l-infrastrutturi rilevanti kollha, bħall-bini, iċ-ċentri tad-data u ż-żoni kklassifikati bħala sensittivi, sabiex jiġi żgurat li l-assi kollha ta’ informazzjoni u l-assi kollha tal-ICT ikunu protetti b’mod adegwat mir-riskji inkluż il-ħsara u l-aċċess jew l-użu mhux awtorizzat.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 9 4
4. Bħala parti mill-qafas tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT imsemmi fl-Artikolu 6(1), l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom:
|
(a)
|
jiżviluppaw u jiddokumentaw politika tas-sigurtà tal-informazzjoni li tiddefinixxi r-regoli għall-protezzjoni tad-disponibbiltà, l-awtentiċità, l-integrità u l-kunfidenzjalità tad-data, l-assi tal-informazzjoni u l-assi tal-ICT, inkluż dawk tal-klijenti tagħhom, fejn applikabbli;
|
|
(b)
|
waqt li jsegwu approċċ ibbażat fuq ir-riskju, jistabbilixxu struttura għaqlija għall-ġestjoni tan-netwerk u tal-infrastruttura bl-użu ta’ tekniki, metodi u protokolli xierqa li jistgħu jinkludu l-implimentazzjoni ta’ mekkaniżmi awtomatizzati biex jiżolaw l-assi tal-informazzjoni fil-każ li jintlaqtu minn ċiberattakki;
|
|
(c)
|
jimplimentaw politiki li jillimitaw l-aċċess fiżiku jew loġiku għall-assi tal-informazzjoni u għall-assi tal-ICT għal dak li huwa meħtieġ għall-funzjonijiet u l-attivitajiet leġittimi u approvati biss, u għal dak il-għan jistabbilixxu sett ta’ politiki, proċeduri u kontrolli li jindirizzaw id-drittijiet tal-aċċess u jiżguraw l-amministrazzjoni għaqlija tagħhom;
|
|
(d)
|
jimplimentaw politiki u protokolli għal mekkaniżmi ta’ awtentikazzjoni b’saħħithom, ibbażati fuq standards rilevanti u sistemi ta’ kontroll dedikati, u miżuri ta’ protezzjoni ta’ ċwievet kriptografiċi li bihom id-data tiġi kriptata abbażi tar-riżultati ta’ proċessi approvati ta’ klassifikazzjoni tad-data u ta’ valutazzjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT;
|
|
(e)
|
jimplimentaw politiki, proċeduri u kontrolli dokumentati għall-ġestjoni tal-bidliet fl-ICT, inkluż bidliet fis-software, fil-hardware, fil-komponenti tal-firmware, parametri ta’ sistemi jew sigurtà, li jkunu bbażati fuq approċċ ta’ valutazzjoni tar-riskju u li huma parti integrali mill-proċess globali ta’ ġestjoni tat-tibdil tal-entità finanzjarja, sabiex jiżguraw li l-bidliet kollha fis-sistemi tal-ICT jiġu rreġistrati, ittestjati, ivvalutati, approvati, implimentati u vverifikati b’mod ikkontrollat;
|
|
(f)
|
ikollhom politiki dokumentati xierqa u komprensivi għal software korrettiv u ta’ aġġornament.
|
Għall-finijiet tal-ewwel subparagrafu, il-punt (b), l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom ifasslu l-infrastruttura tal-konnessjoni tan-netwerk b’tali mod li din tkun tista’ tinqata’ b’mod istantanju jew tiġi segmentata sabiex jimminimizzaw u jipprevjenu l-kontaġju, speċjalment tal-proċessi finanzjarji interkonnessi.
Għall-finijiet tal- ewwel subparagrafu, il-punt (e), il-proċess ta’ ġestjoni tat-tibdil fl-ICT għandu jiġi approvat mil-livelli xierqa tal-maniġment u għandu jkollu protokolli speċifiċi stabbiliti.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 24 Responsabbiltà tal-kontrollur
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 17 Sistema ta' ġestjoni tal-kwalità
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 28 Governanza u organizzazzjoni
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 5 Governanza u organizzazzjoni
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 9 Protezzjoni u prevenzjoni
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 16 Qafas simplifikat tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 5 1
1. L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandu jkollhom fis-seħħ qafas intern ta’ governanza u kontroll li jiżgura l-ġestjoni effettiva u prudenti tar-riskju tal-ICT, f’konformità mal-Artikolu 6(4), sabiex jinkiseb livell għoli ta’ reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 16 1
1. L-Artikoli 5 sa 15 ta’ dan ir-Regolament ma għandhomx japplikaw għal ditti tal-investiment żgħar u mhux interkonnessi, istituzzjonijiet ta’ pagament eżentati skont id-Direttiva (UE) 2015/2366; istituzzjonijiet eżentati skont id-Direttiva 2013/36/UE li fir-rigward tagħhom l-Istati Membri ddeċidew li ma japplikawx l-opzjoni msemmija fl-Artikolu 2(4) ta’ dan ir-Regolament; istituzzjonijiet tal-flus elettroniċi eżentati skont id-Direttiva 2009/110/KE; u istituzzjonijiet żgħar għall-provvista ta’ rtirar okkupazzjonali.
Mingħajr preġudizzju għall-ewwel subparagrafu, l-entitajiet elenkati fl-ewwel subparagrafu għandhom:
|
(a)
|
jistabbilixxu u jżommu qafas għall-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT li jkun sod u ddokumentat li jiddeskrivi fid-dettall il-mekkaniżmi u l-miżuri mmirati lejn ġestjoni rapida, effiċjenti u komprensiva tar-riskju tal-ICT, inkluż għall-protezzjoni ta’ komponenti u infrastrutturi fiżiċi rilevanti;
|
|
(b)
|
jimmonitorjaw b’mod kontinwu s-sigurtà u l-funzjonament tas-sistemi kollha tal-ICT;
|
|
(c)
|
jimminimizzaw l-impatt tar-riskju tal-ICT billi jużaw sistemi, protokolli u għodod tal-ICT li jkunu sodi, reżiljenti u aġġornati u li jkunu xierqa biex jappoġġjaw it-twettiq tal-attivitajiet tagħhom u l-forniment tas-servizzi u jipproteġu b’mod adegwat id-disponibbiltà, l-awtentiċità, l-integrità u l-kunfidenzjalità tad-data fin-netwerk u fis-sistemi tal-informazzjoni;
|
|
(d)
|
jippermettu li s-sorsi ta’ riskju tal-ICT u anomaliji fin-netwerk u fis-sistemi tal-informazzjoni jiġu identifikati u individwati fil-pront u li l-inċidenti relatati mal-ICT jiġu mmaniġġati malajr;
|
|
(e)
|
jidentifikaw dipendenzi ewlenin fuq fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT;
|
|
(f)
|
jiżguraw il-kontinwità ta’ funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti, permezz ta’ pjanijiet ta’ kontinwità tal-operat u miżuri ta’ rispons u ta’ rkupru, li jinkludu, mill-inqas, miżuri ta’ backup u restawr;
|
|
(g)
|
jittestjaw, fuq bażi regolari, il-pjanijiet u l-miżuri msemmija fil-punt (f), kif ukoll l-effettività tal-kontrolli implimentati f’konformità mal-punti (a) u (c);
|
|
(h)
|
jimplimentaw, kif xieraq, konklużjonijiet operazzjonali rilevanti li jirriżultaw mit-testijiet imsemmija fil-punt (g) u mill-analiżi ta’ wara l-inċident fil-proċess ta’ valutazzjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT u jiżviluppaw, skont il-ħtiġijiet u l-profil tar-riskju tal-ICT, programmi ta’ sensibilizzazzjoni dwar is-sigurtà tal-ICT u taħriġ dwar ir-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali għall-persunal u għall-maniġment.
|
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 16 2
2. Il-qafas tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT imsemmi fil-paragrafu 1, it-tieni subparagrafu, il-punt (a), għandu jiġi ddokumentat u rieżaminat perjodikament u malli jseħħu inċidenti kbar relatati mal-ICT, f’konformità mal-istruzzjonijiet superviżorji. Huwa għandu jittejjeb kontinwament abbażi tal-lezzjonijiet meħuda mill-implimentazzjoni u l-monitoraġġ. Rapport dwar ir-rieżami tal-qafas tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT għandu jiġi ppreżentat lill-awtorità kompetenti fuq talba tagħha.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 95 Ġestjoni ta’ riskji operattivi u ta’ sigurtà
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 97 Awtentikazzjoni
-
|
Kwistjonijiet marbuta
Links
| Tip ta’ link |
Kwistjoni |
|
is related to
|
Annual |
|
is related to
|
relative Control Weighting = 10 |
|
is related to
|
Process |
|
is related to
|
Govern |
|
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
|
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
|
Harm from Illegal, Abusive or Unsafe Content / Conduct |
|
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 |
|
blocks
|
Failure to Achieve Strategic / Mission Objectives |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Critical Knowledge / Capability |
|
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
|
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
|
Economic Shock / Market Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
OIS-01.01B |
|
blocks
|
OIS-01.02B |
|
is blocked by
|
GOV-02 Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) – Assessment Procedure |
|
blocks
|
PM-01 Information Security Program Plan |
|
blocks
|
03.15.01 Policy and Procedures |
|
blocks
|
GV GOVERN |
|
blocks
|
GV.RM-01 Risk management objectives are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders |
|
blocks
|
GV.RM-03 Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk management processes |
|
blocks
|
GV.RR-01 Organizational leadership is responsible and accountable for cybersecurity risk and fosters a culture that is risk-aware, ethical, and continually … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-01 A cybersecurity supply chain risk management program, strategy, objectives, policies, and processes are established and agreed to by organizational … |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-03 Cybersecurity supply chain risk management is integrated into cybersecurity and enterprise risk management, risk assessment, and improvement processes |
|
blocks
|
GV.SC-09 Supply chain security practices are integrated into cybersecurity and enterprise risk management programs, and their performance is monitored … |
|
blocks
|
ID.RA Risk Assessment |
|
blocks
|
PR PROTECT |
|
blocks
|
PR.IR Technology Infrastructure Resilience |
- 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.
|