+Executive Leadership Approval For Managing Material Risk
|
Executive Leadership Approval For Managing Material Risk
Description
Mechanisms exist to obtain executive leadership approval for risk management decisions involving material risk.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Owner approves decisions on significant risks; decisions documented
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Executive sign-off for material risk decisions recorded in risk register
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Material risk decisions escalated to executive leadership with documented approval
∙ Risk register with approval fields
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Risk governance committee with executive approval authority for material risks
∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise risk governance with board/executive approval workflows for material risk
∙ Enterprise GRC platform (e.g., Archer, MetricStream, ServiceNow IRM)
∙ Materiality determination procedures
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
SCR-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 Defined
Risk Management (RSK) 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 RSK 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 RSK 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 RSK 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 RSK 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 obtain executive leadership approval for risk management decisions involving material risk.
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. Visão geral
1.1 Referências
1.2 Requisitos identificados
1.3 Regulamentos relacionados
2. Requisitos identificados
Requisitos
| Fonte |
Requisito |
3. Regulamentos relacionados
Regulamentos
| Fonte |
Regulamentação |
|
EULAW
|
Artigo 3.o Gestão do risco associado às TIC
Artigo 3.o
Gestão do risco associado às TIC
As entidades financeiras devem desenvolver, documentar e aplicar políticas e procedimentos de gestão do risco associado às TIC que incluam todos os elementos seguintes:
a)
Uma indicação da aprovação do nível de tolerância ao risco associado às TIC estabelecido em conformidade com o artigo 6.o, n.o 8, alínea b), do Regulamento (UE) 2022/2554;
b)
Um procedimento e uma metodologia para realizar a avaliação do risco associado às TIC, que identifiquem:
i)
as vulnerabilidades e ameaças que afetem ou possam afetar as funções operacionais apoiadas, os sistemas de TIC e os ativos de TIC que apoiam essas funções,
ii)
os indicadores quantitativos ou qualitativos para medir o impacto e a probabilidade das vulnerabilidades e ameaças referidas na subalínea i);
c)
O procedimento para identificar, aplicar e documentar medidas de tratamento do risco associado às TIC para os riscos associados às TIC identificados e avaliados, designadamente a determinação das medidas de tratamento do risco associado às TIC necessárias para manter esse risco dentro do nível de tolerância referido na alínea a);
d)
Para os riscos residuais associados às TIC que ainda estejam presentes na sequência da aplicação das medidas de tratamento do risco associado às TIC referido na alínea c):
i)
disposições relativas à identificação desses riscos residuais associados às TIC,
ii)
a atribuição de funções e responsabilidades no que respeita:
(1)
à aceitação dos riscos residuais associados às TIC que excedem o nível de tolerância ao risco da entidade financeira referido na alínea a);
(2)
ao processo de revisão referido na subalínea iv) da presente alínea d);
iii)
a elaboração de um inventário dos riscos residuais associados às TIC aceites, incluindo uma justificação para a sua aceitação,
iv)
disposições relativas à revisão dos riscos residuais associados às TIC aceites, pelo menos uma vez por ano, nomeadamente:
(1)
a identificação de quaisquer alterações dos riscos residuais associados às TIC;
(2)
a avaliação das medidas de mitigação disponíveis;
(3)
uma avaliação para determinar se as razões que justificam a aceitação dos riscos residuais associados às TIC continuam a ser válidas e aplicáveis à data da revisão;
e)
Disposições relativas à monitorização:
i)
de quaisquer alterações do panorama dos riscos associados às TIC e das ciberameaças,
ii)
das vulnerabilidades e ameaças internas e externas,
iii)
do risco associado às TIC da entidade financeira, de um modo que permita a deteção rápida de alterações que possam afetar o seu perfil de risco associado às TIC;
f)
Disposições relativas a um processo para assegurar que quaisquer alterações da estratégia empresarial e da estratégia de resiliência operacional digital da entidade financeira são tidas em conta.
Para efeitos da alínea c), primeiro parágrafo, o procedimento referido nessa alínea deve assegurar:
a)
A monitorização da eficácia das medidas de tratamento do risco associado às TIC aplicadas;
b)
Uma avaliação para determinar se os níveis de tolerância ao risco estabelecidos pela entidade financeira foram atingidos;
c)
Uma avaliação para determinar se a entidade financeira tomou medidas para corrigir ou melhorar essas medidas, quando necessário.
|
Pedidos ligados
- 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.
|