+Risk Tolerance
|
Risk Tolerance
Description
Mechanisms exist to define organizational risk tolerance, the specified range of acceptable results.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Risk Management Program (RMP)
∙ Defined risk tolerance
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Risk Management Program (RMP)
∙ Defined risk tolerance
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Risk Management Program (RMP)
∙ Defined risk tolerance
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Risk Management Program (RMP)
∙ Defined risk tolerance
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Risk Management Program (RMP)
∙ Defined risk tolerance
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 define organizational risk tolerance, the specified range of acceptable results.
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. Prezentare generală
1.1 Referințe
1.2 Cerințe identificate
1.3 Reglementări asociate
2. Cerințe identificate
3. Reglementări asociate
Reglementări
| Sursă |
Reglementare |
|
EULAW
|
Articolul 3 Gestionarea riscurilor TIC
Articolul 3
Gestionarea riscurilor TIC
Entitățile financiare elaborează, documentează și pun în aplicare politici și proceduri de gestionare a riscurilor TIC care conțin toate elementele următoare:
(a)
o indicație a aprobării nivelului de toleranță la risc pentru riscurile TIC stabilit în conformitate cu articolul 6 alineatul (8) litera (b) din Regulamentul (UE) 2022/2554;
(b)
o procedură și o metodologie de efectuare a evaluării riscurilor TIC, care identifică
(i)
vulnerabilitățile și amenințările care afectează sau pot afecta funcțiile operaționale sprijinite, sistemele TIC și activele TIC care sprijină funcțiile respective;
(ii)
indicatorii cantitativi sau calitativi pentru a măsura impactul și probabilitatea apariției vulnerabilităților și amenințărilor menționate la punctul (i);
(c)
procedura de identificare, punere în aplicare și documentare a măsurilor de tratare a riscurilor TIC pentru riscurile TIC identificate și evaluate, inclusiv stabilirea măsurilor de tratare a riscurilor TIC necesare pentru a aduce riscurile TIC la nivelul de toleranță la risc menționat la litera (a);
(d)
pentru riscurile TIC reziduale care sunt încă prezente în urma punerii în aplicare a măsurilor de tratare a riscurilor TIC menționate la litera (c):
(i)
dispoziții privind identificarea acestor riscuri TIC reziduale;
(ii)
atribuirea rolurilor și a responsabilităților în ceea ce privește:
1.
acceptarea riscurilor TIC reziduale care depășesc nivelul de toleranță la risc al entității financiare menționat la litera (a);
2.
procesul de revizuire menționat la punctul (iv) de la prezenta literă (d);
(iii)
elaborarea unui inventar al riscurilor TIC reziduale acceptate, inclusiv o justificare a acceptării acestora;
(iv)
dispoziții privind revizuirea riscurilor TIC reziduale acceptate cel puțin o dată pe an, inclusiv:
1.
identificarea oricăror modificări ale riscurilor TIC reziduale;
2.
evaluarea măsurilor de atenuare disponibile;
3.
evaluarea măsurii în care motivele care justifică acceptarea riscurilor TIC reziduale sunt încă valabile și aplicabile la data revizuirii;
(e)
dispoziții privind monitorizarea:
(i)
oricărei modificări a peisajului riscurilor TIC și amenințărilor cibernetice;
(ii)
vulnerabilităților și amenințărilor interne și externe;
(iii)
riscului TIC al entității financiare care permite detectarea promptă a modificărilor care ar putea afecta profilul său de risc TIC;
(f)
dispoziții privind un proces prin care să se asigure că se ține seama de orice modificare a strategiei de afaceri și a strategiei privind reziliența operațională digitală a entității financiare.
În sensul primului paragraf litera (c), procedura menționată la litera respectivă asigură:
(a)
monitorizarea eficacității măsurilor de tratare a riscurilor TIC care au fost puse în aplicare;
(b)
evaluarea măsurii în care au fost atinse nivelurile de toleranță la risc stabilite pentru entitatea financiară;
(c)
evaluarea măsurii în care entitatea financiară a întreprins acțiuni pentru a corecta sau a îmbunătăți măsurile respective, după caz.
|
|
EULAW
|
Articolul 27 Formatul și conținutul raportului privind revizuirea cadrului de gestionare a riscurilor TIC
|
Tichete legate
- 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.
|