+Strategic Plan & Objectives
|
Strategic Plan & Objectives
Description
Mechanisms exist to establish a:
(1) Strategic security, compliance and resilience-specific business plan; and
(2) Set of objectives to achieve that plan.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Include security tasks in project plans
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Security requirements in project planning
∙ Project security checklist
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Documented cybersecurity and data protection-specific business plan
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Documented cybersecurity and data protection-specific business plan
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Documented cybersecurity and data protection-specific business plan
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
Project & Resource Management (PRM) 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 PRM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRM 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 PRM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Project & Resource Management -related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Project & Resource Management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization's business strategy and prioritizes the objectives and resourcing of the security function, based on broader business requirements.
▪ A Project Management Office (PMO), or project management function, enables the implementation of cybersecurity and data protection-related resource planning controls across the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects.
▪ Quarterly Business Review (QBR), or similar status reporting, exists to provide recurring reports on the state of the cybersecurity and data protection program.
Level 3 Well Defined
Project & Resource Management (PRM) 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 PRM 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 PRM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Project Management Office (PMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain PRM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of project and resource management operations (e.g., project 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 PRM 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).
▪ The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization's business strategy and prioritizes the objectives and resourcing of the security function, based on broader business requirements.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to establish a:
(1) Strategic security, compliance and resilience-specific business plan; and
(2) Set of objectives to achieve that plan.
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. Overzicht
1.1 Referenties
1.2 Geïdentificeerde eisen
1.3 Gerelateerde regelingen
2. Geïdentificeerde eisen
3. Gerelateerde regelingen
Regelingen
| Bron |
Regelgeving |
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 7 ICT-systemen, -protocollen en -instrumenten
Artikel 7
ICT-systemen, -protocollen en -instrumenten
Om ICT-risico aan te pakken en te beheren, gebruiken en onderhouden financiële entiteiten geactualiseerde ICT-systemen, -protocollen en -instrumenten die:
a)
geschikt zijn gezien de omvang van de verrichtingen ter ondersteuning van hun activiteiten, in overeenstemming met het evenredigheidsbeginsel als bedoeld in artikel 4;
c)
voldoende capaciteit hebben voor een nauwkeurige verwerking van de gegevens die nodig zijn voor de uitvoering van activiteiten en de tijdige verlening van diensten, en om zo nodig volumepieken in orders, orderberichten of transacties op te vangen, onder meer wanneer nieuwe technologie wordt ingevoerd;
d)
technologisch gezien voldoende weerbaar zijn om indien nodig in gespannen marktomstandigheden of andere ongunstige situaties naar behoren te voorzien in bijkomende gegevensverwerking.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 2 Algemene elementen van beleidslijnen, procedures, protocollen en tools voor ICT-beveiliging
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 3 ICT-risicobeheersing
Artikel 3
Financiële entiteiten ontwikkelen, documenteren en implementeren beleidslijnen en procedures voor ICT-beveiliging die alle volgende elementen bevatten:
a)
een vermelding van de goedkeuring van het ICT-risicotolerantieniveau dat is vastgesteld overeenkomstig artikel 6, lid 8, punt b), van Verordening (EU) 2022/2554;
b)
een procedure en methode om de ICT-risicobeoordeling te maken, ten behoeve van de identificatie van:
i)
kwetsbaarheden en dreigingen die van invloed zijn of kunnen zijn op de ondersteunde bedrijfsfuncties, de ICT-systemen en ICT-assets die deze functies ondersteunen;
ii)
de kwantitatieve of kwalitatieve indicatoren om de impact en de waarschijnlijkheid van de in punt i) bedoelde kwetsbaarheden en dreigingen te meten;
c)
de procedure om maatregelen voor ICT-risicobehandeling te identificeren, te implementeren en te documenteren voor de in kaart gebrachte en beoordeelde ICT-risico’s, met inbegrip van het vaststellen van maatregelen voor ICT-risicobehandeling die noodzakelijk zijn om het ICT-risico binnen het in punt a) bedoelde risicotolerantieniveau te brengen;
d)
voor de ICT-restrisico’s die na de implementatie van de in punt c) bedoelde maatregelen voor ICT-risicobehandeling nog aanwezig zijn:
i)
bepalingen voor het in kaart brengen van die ICT-restrisico’s;
ii)
de toewijzing van rollen en verantwoordelijkheden wat betreft:
1)
de acceptatie van de ICT-restrisico’s die het in punt a) bedoelde risicotolerantieniveau van de financiële entiteit overschrijden;
2)
het in punt d), iv), bedoelde evaluatieproces;
iii)
het uitwerken van een inventaris van de geaccepteerde ICT-restrisico’s, met inbegrip van een verantwoording voor het accepteren van die risico’s;
iv)
bepalingen betreffende de ten minste jaarlijks uit te voeren evaluatie van de geaccepteerde ICT-restrisico’s, met inbegrip van:
1)
het in kaart brengen van veranderingen in de ICT-restrisico’s;
2)
de beoordeling van beschikbare mitigerende maatregelen;
3)
de beoordeling van de vraag of de redenen om de ICT-restrisico’s te accepteren, nog steeds gelden en van toepassing zijn op de datum van de evaluatie;
e)
bepalingen voor het monitoren van:
i)
veranderingen in het landschap van ICT-risico en cyberdreigingen;
ii)
interne en externe kwetsbaarheden en dreigingen;
iii)
ICT-risico van de financiële entiteit waardoor veranderingen die haar ICT-risicoprofiel kunnen beïnvloeden, snel kunnen worden gedetecteerd;
f)
bepalingen over een proces waarmee veranderingen in de bedrijfsstrategie en de strategie voor digitale weerbaarheid van de financiële entiteit in aanmerking worden genomen.
Voor de toepassing van punt c) van het eerste lid zorgt de in dat punt bedoelde procedure voor:
a)
de monitoring van de doeltreffendheid van de geïmplementeerde maatregel voor ICT-risicobehandeling;
b)
de beoordeling van de vraag of de vastgestelde risicotolerantieniveaus van de financiële entiteit zijn bereikt;
c)
de beoordeling van de vraag of de financiële entiteit acties heeft ondernemen om die maatregelen zo nodig te corrigeren of te verbeteren.
|
|
EULAW
|
Artikel 6 Kader voor ICT-risicobeheer
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Article 6 8
8. The ICT risk management framework shall include a digital operational resilience strategy setting out how the framework shall be implemented. To that end, the digital operational resilience strategy shall include methods to address ICT risk and attain specific ICT objectives, by:
|
(a)
|
explaining how the ICT risk management framework supports the financial entity’s business strategy and objectives;
|
|
(b)
|
establishing the risk tolerance level for ICT risk, in accordance with the risk appetite of the financial entity, and analysing the impact tolerance for ICT disruptions;
|
|
(c)
|
setting out clear information security objectives, including key performance indicators and key risk metrics;
|
|
(d)
|
explaining the ICT reference architecture and any changes needed to reach specific business objectives;
|
|
(e)
|
outlining the different mechanisms put in place to detect ICT-related incidents, prevent their impact and provide protection from it;
|
|
(f)
|
evidencing the current digital operational resilience situation on the basis of the number of major ICT-related incidents reported and the effectiveness of preventive measures;
|
|
(g)
|
implementing digital operational resilience testing, in accordance with Chapter IV of this Regulation;
|
|
(h)
|
outlining a communication strategy in the event of ICT-related incidents the disclosure of which is required in accordance with Article 14.
|
|
Gekoppelde issues
- 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.
|