+Status Reporting To Governing Body

Status Reporting To Governing Body

Description

Mechanisms exist to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations enabling executives to make decisions about matters considered material to the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP).

Possible Solutions & Considerations

Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Simple security status dashboard (spreadsheet or slide deck)
∙ Email status updates to owner/manager

Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Structured security metrics report (incidents, patching status, training completion)
∙ Documented reporting cadence

Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Formal security status reports to leadership
∙ KPI/KRI dashboard (e.g., Power BI, Tableau, or GRC tool reporting)

Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Executive security dashboard with KPIs/KRIs
∙ Board-level reporting on material risk indicators
∙ Automated reporting via GRC platform

Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9

∙ Quarterly Business Review (QBR)
∙ Board and audit committee cybersecurity briefings
∙ Integrated GRC dashboard with real-time metrics
∙ SEC cybersecurity disclosure-ready reporting processes (if applicable)

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

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Governance-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists. GRC roles are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Organizational leadership maintains an informal process to review and respond to trends.

Level 3 Well Defined

Cybersecurity & Data Protection Governance (GOV) 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 GOV 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 GOV domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain GOV 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).
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to provide governance oversight reporting and recommendations to those entrusted to make executive decisions about matters considered material to the organization's Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP).

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. Prehľad

1.1 Odkazy

1.2 Identifikované požiadavky

1.3 Súvisiace predpisy

2. Identifikované požiadavky

Požiadavky

3. Súvisiace predpisy

Predpisy
EULAW Článok 15 Riadenie IKT projektu
-
EULAW Článok 25 Testovanie plánov kontinuity činností v oblasti IKT
-
EULAW Článok 27 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 27 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 28 Správa a riadenie a organizácia
-
EULAW Článok 40 Testovanie plánov kontinuity činností
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 41 Formát a obsah správy o preskúmaní zjednodušeného rámca riadenia IKT rizika
-
EULAW Článok 5 Správa a riadenie a organizácia
-
EULAW Článok 13 Učenie sa a vývoj
-
EULAW Článok 5 2

2.   Riadiaci orgán finančného subjektu vymedzuje a schvaľuje vykonávanie všetkých opatrení súvisiacich s rámcom riadenia IKT rizika uvedeným v článku 6 ods. 1, vykonáva nad ním dozor a zodpovedá zaň.

Na účely prvého pododseku riadiaci orgán:

a)

nesie konečnú zodpovednosť za riadenie IKT rizika finančného subjektu;

b)

zavádza politiky zamerané na zabezpečenie zachovania vysokých noriem dostupnosti, pravosti, integrity a dôvernosti údajov;

c)

stanovuje jasné úlohy a zodpovednosti pre všetky funkcie súvisiace s IKT a zavádza vhodné mechanizmy správy a riadenia s cieľom zabezpečiť účinnú a včasnú komunikáciu, spoluprácu a koordináciu medzi týmito funkciami;

d)

nesie celkovú zodpovednosť za stanovenie a schválenie stratégie digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti, ako sa uvádza v článku 6 ods. 8, vrátane určenia primeranej úrovne tolerancie IKT rizika finančného subjektu, ako sa uvádza v článku 6 ods. 8 písm. b);

e)

schvaľuje, vykonáva dozor a pravidelne preskúmava vykonávanie politiky kontinuity činností finančného subjektu v oblasti IKT a plánov reakcie a obnovy v oblasti IKT uvedených v článku 11 ods. 1 a 3, ktoré sa môžu prijať ako osobitná politika tvoriaca neoddeliteľnú súčasť celkovej politiky kontinuity činností finančného subjektu a plánu reakcie a obnovy finančného subjektu;

f)

schvaľuje a pravidelne preskúmava plány vnútorných auditov IKT, ktoré vypracúva finančný subjekt, audity IKT a ich podstatné zmeny;

g)

prideľuje a pravidelne preskúmava primeraný rozpočet na splnenie potrieb finančného subjektu v oblasti digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti, pokiaľ ide o všetky druhy zdrojov, vrátane relevantných programov zvyšovania informovanosti o bezpečnosti v oblasti IKT a školení o digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti uvedených v článku 13 ods. 6 a IKT zručností pre všetkých zamestnancov;

h)

schvaľuje a pravidelne preskúmava politiku finančného subjektu týkajúcu sa opatrení súvisiacich s využívaním IKT služieb, ktoré poskytujú externí poskytovatelia IKT služieb;

i)

zavádza na podnikovej úrovni kanály nahlasovania, ktoré mu umožnia, aby bol riadne informovaný o:

i)

dojednaniach o využívaní IKT služieb uzavretých s externými poskytovateľmi IKT služieb;

ii)

akýchkoľvek relevantných plánovaných podstatných zmenách týkajúcich sa externých poskytovateľov IKT služieb;

iii)

potenciálnom vplyve takýchto zmien na kritické alebo dôležité funkcie, ktoré podliehajú uvedeným dojednaniam, vrátane zhrnutia analýzy rizík na posúdenie vplyvu uvedených zmien, a aspoň o závažných incidentoch súvisiacich s IKT a ich vplyve, ako aj o opatreniach zameraných na reakciu, obnovu a nápravu.
EULAW Článok 13 5

5.   Vedúci pracovníci v oblasti IKT podávajú aspoň raz ročne riadiacemu orgánu správu o zisteniach uvedených v odseku 3 a predkladajú odporúčania.

Prepojené úlohy

Prepojenia
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 05
is related to Process
is related to Govern
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Failure to Achieve Strategic / Mission Objectives
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
blocks Unperformed / Unowned Control Responsibilities
blocks Uncontrolled Internal Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Uncontrolled Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of internal controls
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Drought & Water Shortage
blocks Earthquakes
blocks Fire & Wildfires
blocks Floods
blocks Hurricanes & Tropical Storms
blocks Landslides & Debris Flow
blocks Pandemic (Disease) Outbreaks
blocks Severe Weather
blocks Space Weather
blocks Thunderstorms & Lightning
blocks Tornadoes
blocks Tsunamis
blocks Volcanoes
blocks Winter Storms & Extreme Cold
blocks Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Economic Shock / Market Disruption
blocks Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI)
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OIS-01.02B
blocks OIS-08.01AC
blocks BCM-01.04B
blocks COM-04.01B
blocks COM-04.02AC
is blocked by GOV-09.1 Status Reporting To Governing Body – Assessment Procedure
blocks 03.12.03 Continuous Monitoring
blocks GV.OV Oversight
blocks GV.OV-01 Cybersecurity risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed to inform and adjust strategy and direction
blocks GV.OV-03 Organizational cybersecurity risk management performance is evaluated and reviewed for adjustments needed
blocks GV.SC Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management
blocks GV.SC-09 Supply chain security practices are integrated into cybersecurity and enterprise risk management programs, and their performance is monitored …
blocks ID IDENTIFY
  • Secure Controls Framework -

    The Secure Controls Framework® (SCF)

    "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.