+Third-Party Contract Requirements
---+Contract Flow-Down Requirements
---+Provider Contingency Plan

Third-Party Contract Requirements

Description

Mechanisms exist to require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls
∙ Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

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

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative.
▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.

Level 3 Well Defined

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 require contractual requirements for applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements with third-parties, reflecting the organization's needs to protect its TAASD.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Third-Party Management (TPM) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational.
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
▪ Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
▪ Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
▪ Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.

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

Contract Flow-Down Requirements

Description

Mechanisms exist to ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable subcontractors and suppliers.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Third-party contract requirements for cybersecurity controls

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

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Third-party management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Procurement practices contractually require ESP to follow secure engineering practices as part of a broader Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) initiative.
▪ A formal agreement exists between the organization and applicable third-parties that includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) addressing shared sensitive data.

Level 3 Well Defined

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 ensure applicable security, compliance and resilience requirements are included in contracts that flow-down to applicable sub-contractors and suppliers.

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.
Provider Contingency Plan

Description

Mechanisms exist to contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

∙ Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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

Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) 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 BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD 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 BCD domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery (BC/DR)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ BC/DR may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.

Level 3 Well Defined

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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 contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

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.

1.1 Odkazy

1.2 Identifikované požiadavky

1.3 Súvisiace predpisy

2. Identifikované požiadavky

Požiadavky

3. Súvisiace predpisy

Predpisy
EULAW Článok 11 Bezpečnosť údajov a systému
-
EULAW Článok 13 Riadenie bezpečnosti siete

Článok 13

Riadenie bezpečnosti siete

Finančné subjekty ako súčasť záruk zaisťujúcich bezpečnosť sietí pred vniknutím a zneužitím údajov vypracujú, zdokumentujú a vykonávajú politiky, postupy, protokoly a nástroje riadenia bezpečnosti siete vrátane všetkých týchto prvkov:

a) 

segregácia a segmentácia IKT systémov a sietí s prihliadnutím na:

i) 

kritickosť alebo dôležitosť funkcie, ktorú tieto IKT systémy a siete podporujú;

ii) 

klasifikácia stanovená v súlade s článkom 8 ods. 1 nariadenia (EÚ) 2022/2554;

iii) 

celkový rizikový profil IKT aktív využívajúcich tieto IKT systémy a siete;

b) 

dokumentácia o všetkých sieťových pripojeniach a tokoch údajov finančného subjektu;

c) 

používanie samostatnej a špecializovanej siete na správu IKT aktív;

d) 

identifikácia a vykonávanie kontrol prístupu do siete s cieľom predchádzať pripojeniam všetkých neoprávnených zariadení alebo systémov alebo akéhokoľvek koncového bodu, ktoré nespĺňa bezpečnostné požiadavky finančného subjektu, do siete finančného subjektu a odhaľovať ich;

e) 

šifrovanie sieťových pripojení prechádzajúcich cez podnikové siete, verejné siete, domáce siete, externé siete a bezdrôtové siete pre používané komunikačné protokoly, pričom sa zohľadnia výsledky schválenej klasifikácie údajov, výsledky posudzovania IKT rizika a šifrovanie sieťových pripojení uvedené v článku 6 ods. 2;

f) 

navrhovanie sietí v súlade s bezpečnostnými požiadavkami v oblasti IKT stanovenými finančným subjektom s prihliadnutím na popredné postupy na zabezpečenie dôvernosti, integrity a dostupnosti siete;

g) 

zabezpečenie sieťovej prevádzky medzi vnútornými sieťami a internetom a inými externými pripojeniami;

h) 

identifikácia úloh, zodpovedností a krokov týkajúcich sa špecifikácie, vykonávania, schvaľovania, zmeny a preskúmania pravidiel firewallu a filtrov pripojení;

i) 

vykonávanie preskúmaní architektúry siete a koncepcie bezpečnosti siete raz ročne a pravidelne v prípade mikropodnikov s cieľom identifikovať potenciálne zraniteľné miesta;

j) 

v prípade potreby opatrenia na dočasnú izoláciu podsietí, sieťových prvkov a zariadení;

k) 

vykonávanie bezpečnej základnej konfigurácie všetkých sieťových prvkov a posilňovanie siete a sieťových zariadení v súlade so všetkými pokynmi pre predajcu, prípadne normami vymedzenými v článku 2 bode 1 nariadenia (EÚ) č. 1025/2012, a poprednými postupmi;

l) 

postupy na obmedzenie, zablokovanie a ukončenie systémových a vzdialených spojení po určitom období nečinnosti;

m) 

v prípade zmlúv o sieťových službách:

i) 

identifikácia a špecifikácia opatrení v oblasti IKT a informačnej bezpečnosti, úrovní služieb a požiadaviek na riadenie všetkých sieťových služieb;

ii) 

či uvedené služby poskytuje vnútroskupinový poskytovateľ IKT služieb alebo externí poskytovatelia IKT služieb.

Na účely písmena h) finančné subjekty pravidelne vykonávajú preskúmanie pravidiel firewallu a filtrov pripojení v súlade s klasifikáciou stanovenou podľa článku 8 ods. 1 nariadenia (EÚ) 2022/2554 a celkovým rizikovým profilom dotknutých IKT systémov. V prípade IKT systémov, ktoré podporujú kritické alebo dôležité funkcie, finančné subjekty overujú primeranosť existujúcich pravidiel firewallu a filtrov pripojenia aspoň každých 6 mesiacov.
EULAW Článok 28 Všeobecné zásady
-
EULAW Článok 29 Predbežné posúdenie rizika koncentrácie IKT na úrovni subjektu
-
EULAW Článok 30 Kľúčové zmluvné ustanovenia
-
EULAW Článok 21 Opatrenia na riadenie kybernetických rizík
-
EULAW Článok 28 Všeobecné zásady
-
EULAW Článok 29 Predbežné posúdenie rizika koncentrácie IKT na úrovni subjektu
-
EULAW Článok 30 Kľúčové zmluvné ustanovenia
-
EULAW Článok 21 Opatrenia na riadenie kybernetických rizík
-
EULAW Článok 28 Všeobecné zásady
-
EULAW Článok 29 Predbežné posúdenie rizika koncentrácie IKT na úrovni subjektu
-
EULAW Článok 30 Kľúčové zmluvné ustanovenia
-
EULAW Článok 21 Opatrenia na riadenie kybernetických rizík
-
EULAW Článok 28 1

1.   Finančné subjekty riadia externé IKT riziko ako integrálnu súčasť IKT rizika v medziach svojho rámca riadenia IKT rizika, ako je uvedené v článku 6 ods. 1, a v súlade s týmito zásadami:

a)

finančné subjekty, ktoré majú uzavreté zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb na vykonávanie svojich obchodných činností, sú vždy plne zodpovedné za dodržiavanie a plnenie všetkých povinností vyplývajúcich z tohto nariadenia a uplatniteľného práva v oblasti finančných službách;

b)

riadenie externého IKT rizika finančnými subjektmi sa vykonáva so zreteľom na zásadu proporcionality, pričom sa zohľadňujú tieto aspekty:

i)

povaha, rozsah, zložitosť a význam závislostí súvisiacich s IKT;

ii)

riziká vyplývajúce zo zmluvných dojednaní o využívaní IKT služieb uzavretých s externými poskytovateľmi IKT služieb, pričom sa zohľadňuje kritickosť alebo dôležitosť príslušnej služby, procesu alebo funkcie, ako aj potenciálny vplyv na kontinuitu a dostupnosť finančných služieb a činností na individuálnej úrovni a na úrovni skupiny.
EULAW Článok 29 2

2.   Ak zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie zahŕňajú možnosť, že externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb ďalej subdodávateľsky zabezpečí IKT služby podporujúce kritickú alebo dôležitú funkciu iným externým poskytovateľom IKT služieb, finančné subjekty zvážia prínosy a riziká, ktoré môžu vzniknúť v súvislosti s takýmto subdodávateľským zabezpečením, najmä v prípade subdodávateľa IKT usadeného v tretej krajine.

Ak sa zmluvné dojednania týkajú IKT služieb podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie, finančné subjekty náležite zohľadnia ustanovenia insolvenčného práva, ktoré by sa uplatnili v prípade konkurzu externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb, ako aj akékoľvek obmedzenia, ktoré môžu vzniknúť v súvislosti s naliehavým obnovením údajov finančného subjektu.

Ak sa zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie uzatvoria s externým poskytovateľom IKT služieb usadeným v tretej krajine, finančné subjekty okrem aspektov uvedených v druhom pododseku zvážia aj súlad s pravidlami Únie v oblasti ochrany údajov a účinné presadzovanie práva v tejto tretej krajine.

Ak zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie umožňujú využívanie subdodávateľských vzťahov, finančné subjekty posúdia, či a ako môžu potenciálne dlhé alebo zložité subdodávateľské reťazce ovplyvniť ich schopnosť plne monitorovať zmluvne dohodnuté funkcie a schopnosť príslušného orgánu účinne vykonávať dohľad nad finančným subjektom v tejto súvislosti.
EULAW Článok 30 1

1.   Práva a povinnosti finančného subjektu a externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb sa jasne pridelia a stanovia písomne. Úplná zmluva zahŕňa dohody o úrovni poskytovaných služieb a zdokumentuje sa v jednom písomnom dokumente, ktorý majú zmluvné strany k dispozícii v papierovej forme, alebo v dokumente v inom stiahnuteľnom, trvalom a prístupnom formáte.
EULAW Článok 30 2

2.   Zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb zahŕňajú aspoň tieto prvky:

a)

jasný a úplný opis všetkých funkcií a IKT služieb, ktoré má externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb poskytovať, pričom sa uvedie, či je povolené zadávanie IKT služieb podporujúcich kritickú alebo dôležitú funkciu alebo jej závažných častí subdodávateľovi, a ak áno, podmienky vzťahujúce sa na takéto využívanie subdodávateľa;

b)

miesta, konkrétne regióny alebo krajiny, kde sa majú poskytovať zmluvne dohodnuté alebo subdodávateľsky zabezpečované funkcie a IKT služby a kde sa majú údaje spracúvať vrátane miesta uchovávania, ako aj požiadavka, aby externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb vopred informoval finančný subjekt, ak plánuje zmeniť takéto miesto;

c)

ustanovenia o dostupnosti, pravosti, integrite alebo dôvernosti v súvislosti s ochranou údajov vrátane osobných údajov;

d)

ustanovenia o zabezpečení obnovy a návratu osobných údajov a iných ako osobných údajov spracúvaných finančným subjektom v ľahko prístupnom formáte v prípade platobnej neschopnosti, riešenia krízových situácií alebo ukončenia obchodných operácií externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb, alebo v prípade ukončenia zmluvných dojednaní, a prístupu k takýmto údajom;

e)

opis úrovne poskytovaných služieb vrátane ich aktualizácií a revízií;

f)

povinnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb poskytovať pomoc finančnému subjektu bez dodatočných nákladov alebo za náklady stanovené ex ante, keď dôjde k IKT incidentu, ktorý súvisí s IKT službou poskytnutou finančnému subjektu;

g)

povinnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb plne spolupracovať s príslušnými orgánmi a orgánmi pre riešenie krízových situácií finančného subjektu, vrátane osôb nimi vymenovanými;

h)

právo ukončiť zmluvný vzťah a súvisiaca minimálna výpovedná lehota na ukončenie zmluvných dojednaní v súlade s očakávaniami príslušných orgánov a orgánov pre riešenie krízových situácií;

i)

podmienky účasti externých poskytovateľov IKT služieb na programoch zvyšovania informovanosti finančných subjektov v oblasti bezpečnosti IKT a na školení v oblasti digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti v súlade s článkom 13 ods. 6
EULAW Článok 30 3

3.   Zmluvné dojednania o využívaní IKT služieb podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie zahŕňajú okrem prvkov uvedených v odseku 2 aspoň tieto prvky:

a)

úplné opisy úrovne služieb vrátane ich aktualizácií a revízií, ako aj presné kvantitatívne a kvalitatívne výkonnostné ciele v rámci dohodnutých úrovní služieb, aby finančný subjekt mohol účinne monitorovať IKT služby a mal možnosť bez zbytočného odkladu vykonať primerané nápravné opatrenia v prípade nesplnenia dohodnutých úrovní služieb;

b)

výpovedné lehoty a nahlasovacie povinnosti externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb voči finančnému subjektu vrátane oznamovania akéhokoľvek vývoja, ktorý by mohol mať významný vplyv na schopnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb účinne poskytovať IKT služby podporujúce kritické alebo dôležité funkcie v súlade s dohodnutými úrovňami služieb;

c)

požiadavky na externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb na vykonávanie a testovanie obchodných krízových plánov a na zavedenie bezpečnostných opatrení, nástrojov a politík v oblasti IKT, ktoré poskytujú primeranú úroveň bezpečnosti na poskytovanie služieb zo strany finančného subjektu v súlade s jeho regulačným rámcom;

d)

povinnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb zúčastňovať sa a plne spolupracovať na TLPT finančného subjektu, ako sa uvádza v článkoch 26 a 27;

e)

právo priebežne monitorovať výkonnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb, ktoré zahŕňa:

i)

neobmedzené práva na prístup, inšpekciu a audit vykonávané finančným subjektom alebo vymenovanou treťou stranou a príslušným orgánom, ako aj právo vyhotovovať kópie príslušnej dokumentácie na mieste, ak je kritická pre operácie externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb, ktorého účinnému vykonávaniu nebránia ani ho neobmedzujú iné zmluvné dojednania alebo vykonávacie politiky;

ii)

právo dohodnúť sa na alternatívnych úrovniach zabezpečenia, ak sú dotknuté práva iných klientov;

iii)

povinnosť externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb plne spolupracovať počas inšpekcií na mieste a auditov vykonávaných príslušnými orgánmi, hlavným orgánom dozoru, finančným subjektom alebo vymenovanou treťou stranou; a

iv)

povinnosť poskytnúť podrobnosti o rozsahu, postupoch, ktoré sa majú dodržiavať, a frekvencii takýchto inšpekcií a auditov;

f)

stratégie ukončenia angažovanosti, najmä zavedenie primeraného povinného prechodného obdobia:

i)

počas ktorého bude externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb naďalej poskytovať príslušné funkcie alebo IKT služby s cieľom znížiť riziko narušenia na úrovni finančného subjektu alebo zabezpečiť efektívne riešenie jeho krízovej situácie a reštrukturalizáciu;

ii)

ktoré umožňuje finančnému subjektu prejsť k inému externému poskytovateľovi IKT služieb alebo začať využívať vlastné riešenia v závislosti od zložitosti poskytovanej služby.

Odchylne od písmena e) sa externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb a finančný subjekt, ktorý je mikropodnikom, môžu dohodnúť, že práva finančného subjektu na prístup, inšpekciu a audit možno delegovať na nezávislú tretiu stranu, ktorú určí externý poskytovateľ IKT služieb, a že finančný subjekt môže kedykoľvek od tretej strany požadovať informácie a uistenie o výkonnosti externého poskytovateľa IKT služieb.
EULAW Článok 30 4

4.   Pri rokovaniach o zmluvných dojednaniach finančné subjekty a externí poskytovatelia IKT služieb zvážia použitie štandardných zmluvných doložiek vypracovaných verejnými orgánmi pre konkrétne služby.

Prepojené úlohy

Prepojenia
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to Process
is related to Identify
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
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 Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Third-Party Physical Security Disruption / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Harm from Unauthorized / Unintended Product or Service Use
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
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 Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Third-Party Physical Security Disruption / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Harm from Unauthorized / Unintended Product or Service Use
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
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 Third-Party Security / Privacy Exposure
blocks Lack of oversight of third-party controls
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
blocks Recovery Failure / Unacceptable Recovery Delay
blocks Third-Party Cybersecurity Compromise / Exposure
blocks Third-Party Physical Security Disruption / Exposure
blocks Sub-Tier / Fourth-Party Supply Chain Exposure
blocks Third-Party Legal / Compliance Exposure
blocks Harm from Unauthorized / Unintended Product or Service Use
blocks Third-Party Dependency Failure
blocks Counterfeit / Non-Conforming Component Impact
blocks Loss of Confidentiality
blocks Privacy Harm / Unauthorized Processing
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 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 Sanctions / Trade Restriction Disruption
blocks Supplier Financial Distress / Insolvency
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks HR-06.02B
blocks PS-01.05B
blocks PS-06.04AC
blocks OPS-11.02B
blocks IAM-07.06B
blocks IAM-07.06AS
blocks IAM-07.01AC
blocks PI-02.01B
blocks PI-02.01AC
blocks PI-02.02AC
blocks DEV-02.01B
blocks SSO-01.01B
blocks SSO-01.02AC
blocks SSO-03.02B
blocks SIM-04.02AC
blocks COM-02.01AC
blocks PSS-12.03B
is blocked by TPM-14 Third-Party Contract Requirements – Assessment Procedure
blocks SR-03(03) Sub-tier Flow Down
blocks 03.01.20 Use of External Systems
blocks 03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel
blocks 03.16.03 External System Services
blocks 03.17.02 Acquisition Strategies, Tools, and Methods
blocks 03.17.03 Supply Chain Requirements and Processes
blocks GV.OC-02 Internal and external stakeholders are understood, and their needs and expectations regarding cybersecurity risk management are understood and …
blocks GV.OC-03 Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements regarding cybersecurity - including privacy and civil liberties obligations - are understood and …
blocks GV.SC-02 Cybersecurity roles and responsibilities for suppliers, customers, and partners are established, communicated, and coordinated internally and …
blocks GV.SC-05 Requirements to address cybersecurity risks in supply chains are established, prioritized, and integrated into contracts and other types of …
blocks GV.SC-06 Planning and due diligence are performed to reduce risks before entering into formal supplier or other third-party relationships
blocks PO.1 Define Security Requirements for Software Development
  • 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.