+Threat Intelligence Program
|
Threat Intelligence Program
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Subscribe to free threat intelligence feeds (e.g., CISA alerts)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ CISA alerts subscription
∙ Basic threat awareness program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Threat intelligence program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Threat intelligence program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Threat intelligence 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
Threat Management (THR) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with THR domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Threat management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with THR 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 THR domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Threat management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Threat management 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
Threat Management (THR) 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 THR 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 THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty 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 THR 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 implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Threat Management (THR) 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 2 Elementi ġenerali tal-politiki, proċeduri, protokolli u għodda ta’ sigurtà tal-ICT
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 3 Ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT
Artikolu 3
Ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT
L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jiżviluppaw, jiddokumentaw u jimplimentaw politiki u proċeduri tal-ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT li għandu jkun fihom dawn kollha li ġejjin:
(a)
indikazzjoni tal-approvazzjoni tal-livell ta’ tolleranza tar-riskju għar-riskju tal-ICT stabbilit f’konformità mal-Artikolu 6(8), il-punt (b) tar-Regolament (UE) 2022/2554;
(b)
proċedura u metodoloġija għat-twettiq tal-valutazzjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT, li tidentifika:
(i)
il-vulnerabbiltajiet u t-theddid li jaffettwaw jew li jistgħu jaffettwaw il-funzjonijiet tan-negozju appoġġati, is-sistemi tal-ICT u l-assi tal-ICT li jappoġġaw dawk il-funzjonijiet;
(ii)
l-indikaturi kwantitattivi jew kwalitattivi biex jitkejlu l-impatt u l-probabbiltà tal-vulnerabbiltajiet u t-theddid imsemmija fil-punt (i);
(c)
il-proċedura biex jiġu identifikati, implimentati u ddokumentati miżuri għat-trattament tar-riskju tal-ICT għar-riskji tal-ICT identifikati u vvalutati, inkluża d-determinazzjoni tal-miżuri għat-trattament tar-riskju tal-ICT meħtieġa biex ir-riskju tal-ICT jinġieb fil-livell tat-tolleranza tar-riskju msemmi fil-punt (a);
(d)
għar-riskji residwali tal-ICT li jkunu għadhom preżenti wara l-implimentazzjoni tal-miżuri tat-trattament tar-riskju tal-ICT imsemmija fil-punt (c):
(i)
dispożizzjonijiet dwar l-identifikazzjoni ta’ dawk ir-riskji residwali tal-ICT;
(ii)
l-assenjazzjoni tar-rwoli u tar-responsabbiltajiet fir-rigward ta’:
(1)
l-aċċettazzjoni tar-riskji residwali tal-ICT li jaqbżu l-livell ta’ tolleranza tar-riskju tal-entità finanzjarja msemmi fil-punt (a);
(2)
għall-proċess ta’ rieżami msemmi fil-punt (iv) ta’ dan il-punt (d);
(iii)
l-iżvilupp ta’ inventarju tar-riskji residwali tal-ICT aċċettati, inkluża ġustifikazzjoni għall-aċċettazzjoni tagħhom;
(iv)
dispożizzjonijiet dwar ir-rieżami tar-riskji residwali tal-ICT aċċettati mill-anqas darba fis-sena, inklużi:
(1)
l-identifikazzjoni ta’ kwalunkwe tibdil fir-riskji residwali tal-ICT;
(2)
il-valutazzjoni tal-miżuri ta’ mitigazzjoni disponibbli;
(3)
il-valutazzjoni ta’ jekk ir-raġunijiet li jiġġustifikaw l-aċċettazzjoni tar-riskji residwali tal-ICT jkunux għadhom validi u applikabbli fid-data tar-rieżami;
(e)
dispożizzjonijiet dwar il-monitoraġġ ta’:
(i)
kwalunkwe tibdil fix-xenarju tar-riskju tal-ICT u tat-theddid ċibernetiku;
(ii)
vulnerabbiltajiet u theddid interni u esterni:
(iii)
ir-riskju tal-ICT tal-entità finanzjarja li jippermetti l-individwazzjoni fil-pront ta’ tibdiliet li jistgħu jaffettwaw il-profil tar-riskju tal-ICT tagħha;
(f)
dispożizzjonijiet dwar proċess biex jiġi żgurat li jitqies kwalunkwe tibdil fl-istrateġija tan-negozju u fl-istrateġija tar-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali tal-entità finanzjarja.
Għall-finijiet tal-ewwel paragrafu, il-punt (c), il-proċedura msemmija f’dak il-punt għandha tiżgura:
(a)
il-monitoraġġ tal-effettività tal-miżuri għat-trattament tar-riskju tal-ICT implimentati;
(b)
il-valutazzjoni ta’ jekk intlaħqux il-livelli ta’ tolleranza tar-riskju stabbiliti tal-entità finanzjarja;
(c)
il-valutazzjoni ta’ jekk l-entità finanzjarja tkunx ħadet azzjonijiet biex tikkoreġi jew ittejjeb dawk il-miżuri meta meħtieġ.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 23 Individwazzjoni ta’ attivitajiet anomali u kriterji għall-individwazzjoni ta’ inċidenti relatati mal-ICT u r-rispons għalihom
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 31 Ġestjoni tar-riskju tal-ICT
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 34 Sigurtà tal-operazzjonijiet tal-ICT
Artikolu 34
Sigurtà tal-operazzjonijiet tal-ICT
L-entitajiet finanzjarji msemmija fl-Artikolu 16(1) tar-Regolament (UE) 2022/2554 għandhom, bħala parti mis-sistemi, mill-protokolli u mill-għodod tagħhom, u għall-assi kollha tal-ICT:
(a)
jimmonitorjaw u jimmaniġġaw iċ-ċiklu tal-ħajja tal-assi kollha tal-ICT;
(b)
jimmonitorjaw jekk l-assi tal-ICT humiex appoġġati minn fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT ta’ entitajiet finanzjarji, meta applikabbli;
(c)
jidentifikaw ir-rekwiżiti tal-kapaċità tal-assi u l-miżuri tal-ICT tagħhom biex iżommu u jtejbu d-disponibbiltà u l-effiċjenza tas-sistemi tal-ICT u jipprevjenu n-nuqqas ta’ kapaċitajiet tal-ICT qabel ma jimmaterjalizzaw;
(d)
iwettqu skennjar u valutazzjonijiet awtomatizzati għall-vulnerabbiltajiet fuq l-assi tal-ICT proporzjonati għall-klassifikazzjoni tagħhom kif imsemmi fl-Artikolu 30(1) u għall-profil tar-riskju ġenerali tal-assi tal-ICT, u jużaw is-software korrettiv biex jirrimedjaw il-vulnerabbiltajiet identifikati;
(e)
jimmaniġġaw ir-riskji relatati ma’ assi tal-ICT skaduti, mhux appoġġati jew miruta;
(f)
jirreġistraw avvenimenti relatati mal-kontroll loġiku u fiżiku tal-aċċess, mal-operazzjonijiet tal-ICT, inklużi l-attivitajiet tat-traffiku tas-sistema u tan-network, u l-ġestjoni tat-tibdil fl-ICT;
(g)
jidentifikaw u jimplimentaw miżuri għall-monitoraġġ u l-analiżi ta’ informazzjoni dwar attivitajiet u mġiba anomali għal operazzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti tal-ICT;
(h)
jimplimentaw miżuri għall-monitoraġġ ta’ informazzjoni rilevanti u aġġornata dwar it-theddid ċibernetiku;
(i)
jimplimentaw miżuri biex jidentifikaw tixrid possibbli ta’ informazzjoni, kodiċi malizzjuż u theddid ieħor għas-sigurtà, u vulnerabbiltajiet magħrufa pubblikament fis-software u fil-hardware, u jivverifikaw aġġornamenti korrispondenti ġodda dwar is-sigurtà.
Għall-finijiet tal-punt (f), l-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jallinjaw il-livell ta’ dettall tar-reġistri mal-iskop u l-użu tagħhom tal-assi tal-ICT li jipproduċi dawk ir-reġistri.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 13 Tagħlim u evoluzzjoni
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 45 Arranġamenti ta’ kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni u l-intelligence dwar it-theddid ċibernetiku
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 13 1
1. L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandu jkollhom fis-seħħ kapaċitajiet u persunal biex jiġbru informazzjoni dwar il-vulnerabbiltajiet u t-theddid ċibernetiku, l-inċidenti relatati mal-ICT, b’mod partikolari ċ-ċiberattakki, u janalizzaw l-impatti probabbli tagħhom fuq ir-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali tagħhom.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 45 1
1. L-entitajiet finanzjarji jistgħu jiskambjaw bejniethom informazzjoni u intelligence dwar theddid ċibernetiku, inkluż indikaturi ta’ kompromess, tattiċi, tekniki, u proċeduri, allerti dwar is-sigurtà ċibernetika u għodod ta’ konfigurazzjoni, sa fejn tali kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni u intelligence:
|
(a)
|
ikollha l-għan li ttejjeb ir-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali tal-entitajiet finanzjarji, b’mod partikolari billi żżid is-sensibilizzazzjoni b’rabta mat-theddid ċibernetiku, tillimita jew timpedixxi l-kapaċità tat-theddid ċibernetiku milli jinxtered, u tappoġġja kapaċitajiet ta’ difiża, tekniki ta’ detezzjoni tat-theddid, strateġiji ta’ mitigazzjoni jew stadji ta’ rispons u rkupru;
|
|
(b)
|
isseħħ fi ħdan komunitajiet fdati ta’ entitajiet finanzjarji;
|
|
(c)
|
tkun implimentata permezz ta’ arranġamenti ta’ kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni li jipproteġu n-natura potenzjalment sensittiva tal-informazzjoni kondiviża, u li jkunu rregolati minn regoli ta’ kondotta b’rispett sħiħ tal-kunfidenzjalità tan-negozju, tal-protezzjoni tad-data personali f’konformità mar-Regolament (UE) 2016/679 u tal-linji gwida dwar il-politika tal-kompetizzjoni.
|
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 45 2
2. Għall-fini tal-paragrafu 1, il-punt (c), l-arranġamenti ta’ kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni għandhom jiddefinixxu l-kondizzjonijiet għall-parteċipazzjoni u, fejn xieraq, għandhom jistabbilixxu d-dettalji dwar l-involviment tal-awtoritajiet pubbliċi u l-kapaċità li fiha dawn jistgħu jkunu assoċjati mal-arranġamenti ta’ kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni, dwar l-involviment ta’ fornituri terzi ta’ servizzi tal-ICT, u dwar l-elementi operazzjonali, inkluż l-użu ta’ pjattaformi tal-IT dedikati.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 45 3
3. L-entitajiet finanzjarji għandhom jinnotifikaw lill-awtoritajiet kompetenti bil-parteċipazzjoni tagħhom fl-arranġamenti ta’ kondiviżjoni ta’ informazzjoni msemmija fil-paragrafu 1, mal-validazzjoni tas-sħubija tagħhom, jew, kif applikabbli, bil-waqfien tas-sħubija tagħhom, ladarba din issir effettiva.
|
Kwistjonijiet marbuta
- 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.
|