|
+Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) Implementation Validation & Interoperability Testing |
Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) Implementation Validation & Interoperability TestingDescriptionMechanisms exist to validate that each Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) implementation:(1) Meets functional and cryptographic requirements; (2) Is interoperable with counterparties and successors; (3) Meets performance criteria for its use case; and (4) Documents test results and exceptions. Possible Solutions & ConsiderationsMicro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2∙ Use vendor-validated PQC implementations only (no custom cryptography)Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4∙ Verify PQC implementations using NIST test vectors (https://csrc.nist.gov/pqc)∙ Use FIPS 140-3 validated modules where available Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6∙ PQC implementation testing using NIST test vectors∙ Interoperability testing with key counterparties ∙ FIPS 140-3 validated module requirement Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8∙ Formal PQC implementation validation program∙ Interoperability testing with counterparties and successors ∙ Performance testing for PQC use cases ∙ Test result documentation Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9∙ Enterprise PQC implementation validation framework∙ Automated test vector validation ∙ Continuous interoperability testing with ecosystem partners ∙ Third-party validation for critical implementations SCR-CMMLevel 0 Not PerformedPractices 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 InformallySCR-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 TrackedSCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control:▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts). Level 3 Well DefinedQuantum Security (QTS) 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 QTS 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 QTS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A risk management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain QTS domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of risk management operations (e.g., risk management solution, GRC platform and TPRM tool). ▪ 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 QTS 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 validate that each Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) implementation: (1) Meets functional and cryptographic requirements; (2) Is interoperable with counterparties and successors; (3) Meets performance criteria for its use case; and (4) Documents test results and exceptions. Level 4 Quantitatively ControlledUtilize 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 ImprovingUtilize 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. Przegląd
1.1 Odwołania1.2 Zidentyfikowane wymagania1.3 Powiązane regulacje2. Zidentyfikowane wymagania
3. Powiązane regulacje
Powiązane zgłoszenia
|