+Security, Compliance & Resilience Outsourcing Limitations
---+Outsourcing Non-Essential Functions or Services
|
Security, Compliance & Resilience Outsourcing Limitations
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure organizations involved in developing, implementing and/or maintaining Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) provide assurance of internal oversight capabilities that demonstrate:
(1) Governance of internal controls;
(2) Risk management, including analysis and mitigation activities; and
(3) Compliance with applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Vendor due diligence checklist
∙ Third-party security questionnaire (e.g., CAIQ, SIG)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Vendor security questionnaire (CAIQ or SIG)
∙ Third-party risk assessment prior to outsourcing
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Third-party risk management program
∙ Vendor security assessments with contractual security obligations
∙ Contract security requirements for outsourced functions
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Third-party risk management (TPRM) program
∙ Vendor SOC 2 and ISO 27001 certification requirements
∙ Contractual security and compliance obligations
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise TPRM program with automated vendor risk assessment
∙ Third-party risk ratings (e.g., BitSight, SecurityScorecard)
∙ Contractual oversight and audit rights for outsourced functions
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
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.
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 organizations involved in developing, implementing and/or maintaining Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) provide assurance of internal oversight capabilities that demonstrate:
(1) Governance of internal controls;
(2) Risk management, including analysis and mitigation activities; and
(3) Compliance with applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
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. Ħarsa ġenerali
| Titlu |
Standard |
|
Outsourcing Non-Essential Functions or Services
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to identify non-essential functions or services that are capable of being outsourced to external service providers and align with the organization's enterprise architecture and security standards.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Identify non-core IT functions suitable for outsourcing (e.g., email hosting)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Documented list of outsourced non-essential functions with security requirements
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Outsourcing decisions aligned with business strategy and risk assessment
∙ Security requirements in outsourcing contracts
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Sourcing strategy identifying outsourceable non-essential functions
∙ Third-party risk assessment before outsourcing
∙ Contractual security requirements
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise sourcing governance aligned with business strategy and C-SCRM
∙ Outsourcing risk assessments and regulatory notifications where required
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
Secure Engineering & Architecture (SEA) 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 SEA domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with SEA 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 SEA domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Secure engineering and architecture-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Secure engineering and architecture management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel define entity-specific secure engineering practices to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability and Safety (CIAS) of the entity's TAASD.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel align secure engineering practices with the entity's broader IT architecture practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel use secure engineering practices to influence Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC).
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 identify non-essential functions or services that are capable of being outsourced to external service providers and align with the organization's enterprise architecture and security standards.
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
3. Regolamenti relatati
Regolamenti
| Sors |
Regolamentazzjoni |
|
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.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
|
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
|
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
|
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 = 07 |
|
is related to
|
Govern |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Authorization / Certification / License |
|
blocks
|
Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care |
|
blocks
|
Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information |
|
blocks
|
Concentration / Single-Point Dependency Failure |
|
blocks
|
Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact |
|
blocks
|
Loss of Confidentiality |
|
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
|
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
|
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) |
|
blocks
|
Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention |
|
blocks
|
Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption |
|
blocks
|
Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency |
|
blocks
|
Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption |
|
is blocked by
|
TPM-05 Security, Compliance & Resilience Outsourcing Limitations – Assessment Procedure |
- 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.
|