+Vulnerability & Patch Management Program (VPMP)
|
Vulnerability & Patch Management Program (VPMP)
Description
Mechanisms exist to facilitate the implementation and monitoring of risk-based vulnerability management capabilities.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Third-party advisors (e.g., virtual CISO, Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP), etc.)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Third-party advisors (e.g., virtual CISO, Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP), etc.)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Vulnerability & Patch Management Program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Vulnerability & Patch Management Program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Vulnerability & Patch Management 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
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with VPM domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Attack Surface Management (ASM)-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 apply software patches through an informal process.
▪ Occasional vulnerability scanning is conducted on High Value Assets (HVAs).
▪ Vulnerability scanning services may not be internal competencies and have to be outsourced.
▪ Penetration testing services may not be internal competencies and have to be outsourced.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) 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 VPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with VPM 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 VPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Vulnerability management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Vulnerability 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 the breadth and depth of coverage for vulnerability scanning that covers system components scanned and types of vulnerabilities that are checked for.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel maintain a structured process to apply software patches and other vulnerability remediation efforts.
Level 3 Well Defined
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) 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 VPM 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 VPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A vulnerability management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain VPM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of vulnerability management operations (e.g., patch management solution and vulnerability scanning 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 VPM 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 facilitate the implementation and monitoring of vulnerability management controls.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Vulnerability & Patch Management (VPM) 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 21 Miżuri ta' ġestjoni tar-riskji taċ-ċibersigurtà
-
|
|
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 10 Ġestjoni tal-vulnerabbiltà u tal-patches
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 10 Ġestjoni tal-vulnerabbiltà u tal-patches
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 10 Ġestjoni tal-vulnerabbiltà u tal-patches
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 10 Ġestjoni tal-vulnerabbiltà u tal-patches
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 10 Ġestjoni tal-vulnerabbiltà u tal-patches
-
|
|
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 9 Protezzjoni u prevenzjoni
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 25 L-ittestjar ta’ għodod u sistemi tal-ICT
-
|
|
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 25 1
1. Il-programm tal-ittestjar tar-reżiljenza operazzjonali diġitali msemmi fl-Artikolu 24 għandu, f’konformità mal-kriterji stabbiliti fl-Artikolu 4(2), jipprevedi t-twettiq ta’ testijiet xierqa, bħall-valutazzjonijiet u skrutinju tal-vulnerabbiltà, analiżijiet ta’ sorsi miftuħa, valutazzjonijiet tas-sigurtà tan-netwerk, analiżijiet tal-lakuni, rieżamijiet tas-sigurtà fiżika, kwestjonarji u soluzzjonijiet ta’ software ta’ skrutinju, rieżamijiet tal-kodiċi tas-sors fejn fattibbli, testijiet ibbażati fuq xenarji, ittestjar tal-kompatibbiltà, ittestjar tal-prestazzjoni, ittestjar minn tarf sa tarf jew ittestjar tal-penetrazzjoni.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 25 2
2. Id-depożitorji ċentrali tat-titoli u l-kontropartijiet ċentrali għandhom iwettqu valutazzjonijiet tal-vulnerabbiltà qabel kwalunkwe użu jew użu mill-ġdid ta’ applikazzjonijiet u komponenti tal-infrastruttura, u servizzi tal-ICT ġodda jew eżistenti li jappoġġjaw il-funzjonijiet kritiċi jew importanti tal-entità finanzjarja.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikolu 25 3
3. Il-mikrointrapriżi għandhom iwettqu t-testijiet imsemmija fil-paragrafu 1 billi jikkombinaw approċċ ibbażat fuq ir-riskju ma’ ppjanar strateġiku tal-ittestjar tal-ICT, billi jqisu kif xieraq il-ħtieġa li jinżamm approċċ bilanċjat bejn l-iskala tar-riżorsi u ż-żmien li għandu jiġi allokat għall-ittestjar tal-ICT previst f’dan l-Artikolu, minn naħa waħda, u l-urġenza, it-tip ta’ riskju, il-kritikalità tal-assi tal-informazzjoni u tas-servizzi pprovduti, kif ukoll kwalunkwe fattur rilevanti ieħor, inkluż il-kapaċità tal-entità finanzjarja li tieħu riskji kkalkulati, min-naħa l-oħra.
|
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.
|