+Configuration Change Control

Configuration Change Control

Description

Mechanisms exist to govern the technical configuration change control processes.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com)

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

∙ Change Control Board (CCB)
∙ Configuration Management Database (CMDB)
∙ VisibleOps (https://itpi.org)
∙ ITIL 4 (https://axelos.com)

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

Change Management (CHG) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CHG domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Change management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Requests for Change (RFC) are submitted to IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Documented change control processes are either informal or do not exist.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Change management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Change management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Business stakeholders and process owners ensure changes to Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) within the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) are controlled through formal change control procedures.
▪ Configuration management practices prevent unauthorized changes by limiting and reviewing permissions to modify TAAS components within a production/operational environment
▪ A Change Advisory Board (CAB), or similar function, exists to govern Requests For Change (RFC) to TAAS to ensure security, compliance and resilience.
▪ The CAB includes a function to review RFCs for cybersecurity and data protection ramifications.
▪ The CAB notifies affected stakeholders to ensure awareness of the impact of proposed changes.
▪ Unauthorized configuration changes are responded to in accordance with an Incident Response Plan (IRP) to determine if the unauthorized configuration is malicious in nature.

Level 3 Well Defined

Change Management (CHG) 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 CHG 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 CHG domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A centralized Change Management Office (CMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CHG domain capabilities.
▪ Technical procedures (e.g., ITIL change enablement) are utilized along with change management governance capabilities (e.g., Change Advisory Board (CAB)) to ensure successful, efficient and secure change management operations.
▪ 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 CHG 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 govern the technical configuration change control processes.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Change Management (CHG) 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

Rekwiżiti

3. Regolamenti relatati

Regolamenti
EULAW Artikolu 17 Ġestjoni tat-tibdil fl-ICT
-
EULAW Artikolu 17 Ġestjoni tat-tibdil fl-ICT
-
EULAW Artikolu 38 Ġestjoni tal-proġetti tal-ICT u tat-tibdil tagħhom
-
EULAW Artikolu 9 Protezzjoni u prevenzjoni
-
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.

Kwistjonijiet marbuta

Links
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 09
is related to Process
is related to Protect
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Unauthorized Access
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 Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
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 Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
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 relative Control Weighting = 08
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
blocks VNC
blocks Python
blocks Software Extensions
blocks Supply Chain Compromise
blocks Compromise Hardware Supply Chain
blocks Data from Information Repositories
blocks Confluence
blocks Sharepoint
blocks Messaging Applications
blocks Firmware Corruption
blocks Pre-OS Boot
blocks System Firmware
blocks Bootkit
blocks ROMMONkit
blocks TFTP Boot
blocks Create or Modify System Process
blocks Systemd Service
blocks Event Triggered Execution
blocks Re-opened Applications
blocks XDG Autostart Entries
blocks Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism
blocks Subvert Trust Controls
blocks Code Signing Policy Modification
blocks Credentials from Password Stores
blocks Network Provider DLL
blocks Email Hiding Rules
blocks Modify Cloud Compute Configurations
blocks Modify System Image
blocks Patch System Image
blocks Downgrade System Image
blocks Plist File Modification
blocks Power Settings
blocks Modify Cloud Resource Hierarchy
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Loss of Data Integrity
blocks Loss of Data / Service Availability
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 Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OPS-16.02B
blocks OPS-34.02B
blocks CRY-02.02B
blocks DEV-03.01B
blocks DEV-10.01B
is blocked by CHG-03 Configuration Change Control – Assessment Procedure
blocks CM-03 Configuration Change Control
blocks SA-08(31) Secure System Modification
blocks CM-03 [M] Configuration Change Control
blocks CM-03 [H] Configuration Change Control
blocks 03.04.02 Configuration Settings
blocks 03.04.03 Configuration Change Control
blocks 03.07.05 Nonlocal Maintenance
blocks ID.RA-07 Changes and exceptions are managed, assessed for risk impact, recorded, and tracked
  • 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.