+Physical Access Control
---+Physical Access Device Inventories
|
Physical Access Control
Description
Physical access control mechanisms exist to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Physical security policy
∙ Door locks and key management
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Physical security policy
∙ Access log
∙ Visitor procedures
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Staffed lobby (receptionist)
∙ Physical security guards
∙ Verify individual access authorizations before granting access to the facility.
∙ Control entry to the facility containing the system using physical access devices and/or guards.
∙ Control access to areas officially designated as publicly accessible in accordance with the organization's assessment of risk.
∙ Secure keys, combinations and other physical access devices.
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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PES 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 PES domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Physical security / facilities management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Physical security / facilities management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies primarily focus on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs), including environments where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and processed.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies ensure that only authorized personnel are allowed access to secure areas.
▪ A facilities maintenance team, or similar function, manages the operation of automated physical and environmental protection controls.
▪ Physical security controls and technologies are configured to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Level 3 Well Defined
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES 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 PES domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A facilities management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain NET domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of physical and environmental security operations (e.g., facility management solution, visitor log management automation and proximity badge access).
▪ 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 PES 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 physical security capability exists to enforce physical access authorizations for all physical access points (including designated entry/exit points) to facilities (excluding those areas within the facility officially designated as publicly accessible).
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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
| Názov |
Štandard |
|
Physical Access Device Inventories
|
Description
Mechanisms exist to maintain an accurate inventory of all physical access devices (e.g., RFID cards, access fobs and door keys).
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Key and badge log (spreadsheet) with holder name
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Key/badge inventory with issuance and return records
∙ Periodic reconciliation of issued devices
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Physical access control system badge inventory
∙ Key management log or key cabinet (e.g., KeyWatcher)
∙ Annual reconciliation
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ PACS credential inventory reconciled with HR roster
∙ Electronic key management system (e.g., Traka, KeyWatcher)
∙ Quarterly reconciliation
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise PACS credential lifecycle management
∙ Electronic key management with audit trail
∙ Automated reconciliation against identity system
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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with PES domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Physical security-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Physical security controls are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards), focusing on protecting High Value Assets (HVAs).
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel implement appropriate physical security practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's technology assets and data.
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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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 PES 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 PES domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A facilities management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain NET domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of physical and environmental security operations (e.g., facility management solution, visitor log management automation and proximity badge access).
▪ 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 PES 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 maintain an accurate inventory of all physical access devices (e.g., RFID cards, access fobs and door keys).
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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
Physical & Environmental Security (PES) 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.
▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.
▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
|
1.1 Odkazy
1.2 Identifikované požiadavky
1.3 Súvisiace predpisy
2. Identifikované požiadavky
Požiadavky
| Zdroj |
Požiadavka |
3. Súvisiace predpisy
Predpisy
| Zdroj |
Regulácia |
|
EULAW
|
Článok 21 Kontrola prístupu
Článok 21
Finančné subjekty v rámci svojej kontroly práv na riadenie prístupu vypracujú, zdokumentujú a vykonávajú politiku, ktorá obsahuje všetky tieto prvky:
a)
prideľovanie prístupových práv k aktívam IKT na základe zásady potreby poznať (need-to-know), zásady potreby používať (need-to-use) a zásady minimálneho privilégia (least privilege principle), a to aj v prípade vzdialeného a núdzového prístupu;
b)
segregácia povinností určených na zabránenie neoprávnenému prístupu ku kritickým údajom alebo na zabránenie prideľovaniu kombinácií prístupových práv, ktoré sa môžu použiť na obchádzanie kontrol;
c)
ustanovenie o zodpovednosti používateľa tým, že sa v čo najväčšej možnej miere obmedzí používanie generických a spoločných používateľských účtov a zabezpečí sa, aby boli používatelia vždy identifikovateľní, pokiaľ ide o činnosti, ktoré v IKT systémoch vykonávajú;
d)
ustanovenie o obmedzeniach prístupu k IKT aktívam, v ktorom sa stanovujú kontroly a nástroje na zabránenie neoprávnenému prístupu;
e)
postupy riadenia účtov na účely udeľovania, zmeny alebo odoberania prístupových práv k používateľským a generickým účtom vrátane generických správcovských účtov, vrátane ustanovení o všetkých týchto prvkoch:
i)
prideľovanie úloh a zodpovedností za udeľovanie, preskúmavanie a odoberanie prístupových práv;
ii)
prideľovanie privilegovaného, núdzového a správcovského prístupu na základe potreby používať (need-to-use) alebo na ad hoc základe pre všetky IKT systémy;
iii)
odobratie prístupových práv bez zbytočného odkladu po skončení pracovného pomeru, alebo ak prístup už nie je potrebný;
iv)
aktualizácia prístupových práv, ak sú potrebné zmeny, a to aspoň raz ročne v prípade všetkých IKT systémov iných ako IKT systémy podporujúce kritické alebo dôležité funkcie a aspoň každých 6 mesiacov v prípade IKT systémov podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie;
f)
metódy autentifikácie vrátane všetkých týchto prvkov:
i)
používanie metód autentifikácie zodpovedajúcich klasifikácii stanovenej v súlade s článkom 8 ods. 1 nariadenia (EÚ) 2022/2554 a celkovému rizikovému profilu IKT aktív a s prihliadnutím na popredné postupy;
ii)
používanie silných metód autentifikácie v súlade s poprednými postupmi a technikami v prípade vzdialeného prístupu do siete finančného subjektu, privilegovaného prístupu, prístupu k IKT aktívam podporujúcim kritické alebo dôležité funkcie alebo IKT aktívam, ktoré sú verejne prístupné;
g)
opatrenia na kontrolu fyzického prístupu vrátane týchto prvkov:
i)
identifikácia a vedenie záznamov o fyzických osobách, ktoré majú povolenie na prístup do priestorov, do dátových centier a citlivých určených oblastí identifikovaných finančným subjektom, v ktorých majú sídlo IKT a informačné aktíva;
ii)
udeľovanie fyzických prístupových práv ku kritickým IKT aktívam len oprávneným osobám v súlade so zásadou potreba poznať (need-to-know) a zásadou minimálneho privilégia a na ad hoc základe;
iii)
monitorovanie fyzického prístupu do priestorov, do dátových centier a citlivých určených oblastí identifikovaných finančným subjektom, v ktorých majú sídlo IKT a informačné aktíva alebo oboje;
iv)
preskúmanie fyzických prístupových práv na zabezpečenie urýchleného odobratia nepotrebných prístupových práv.
Na účely písmena e) bodu i) finančné subjekty stanovia obdobie uchovávania, pričom zohľadnia obchodné ciele a ciele v oblasti informačnej bezpečnosti, dôvody zaznamenania udalosti do záznamových protokolov a výsledky posudzovania IKT rizika.
Na účely písmena e) bodu ii) finančné subjekty podľa možnosti používajú na plnenie administratívnych úloh týkajúcich sa IKT systémov osobitné účty. Ak je to uskutočniteľné a vhodné, finančné subjekty zavedú na riadenie privilegovaného prístupu automatizované riešenia.
Na účely písmena g) bodu i) zodpovedá identifikácia a vedenie záznamov významu priestorov, dátových centier, citlivých určených oblastí a kritickosti operácií alebo IKT systémov, ktoré sa v nich nachádzajú.
Na účely písmena g) bodu iii) zodpovedá monitorovanie klasifikácii stanovenej v súlade s článkom 8 ods. 1 nariadenia (EÚ) 2022/2554 a kritickosti oblasti, do ktorej sa pristupuje.
|
|
EULAW
|
Článok 32 Fyzická a environmentálna bezpečnosť
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Článok 33 Kontrola prístupu
Článok 33
Finančné subjekty uvedené v článku 16 ods. 1 nariadenia (EÚ) 2022/2554 vypracujú, zdokumentujú a vykonávajú postupy na kontrolu logického a fyzického prístupu, pričom tieto postupy presadzujú, monitorujú a pravidelne preskúmavajú. Tieto postupy obsahujú nasledujúce prvky kontroly logického a fyzického prístupu:
a)
prístupové práva k informačným aktívam, IKT aktívam a funkciám podporovaným IKT aktívami, ako aj ku kritickým miestam prevádzky finančného subjektu sa riadia na základe potreby poznať (need-to-know), zásady potreby používať (need-to-use) a zásady minimálneho privilégia (least privilege principle), a to aj v prípade vzdialeného a núdzového prístupu;
b)
zodpovednosť používateľa, ktorá zabezpečuje, aby používatelia mohli byť identifikovaní, pokiaľ ide o činnosti, ktoré v IKT systémoch vykonávajú;
c)
postupy riadenia účtov na účely udeľovania, zmeny alebo odoberania prístupových práv k používateľským a generickým účtom vrátane generických správcovských účtov;
d)
metódy autentifikácie, ktoré zodpovedajú klasifikácii uvedenej v článku 30 ods. 1 a celkovému rizikovému profilu IKT aktív a ktoré sú založené na popredných postupoch;
e)
pravidelné preskúmanie prístupových práv a ich odobratie, keď už nie sú potrebné.
Na účely písmena c) finančný subjekt prideľuje privilegovaný, núdzový a správcovský prístup na základe potreby používať (need-to-use) alebo na ad hoc základe ku všetkým IKT systémom, pričom daný prístup sa zaznamená v súlade s článkom 34 ods. 1 písm. f).
Na účely písmena d) finančné subjekty používajú silné metódy autentifikácie, ktoré sú založené na popredných postupoch v prípade vzdialeného prístupu do siete finančných subjektov, privilegovaného prístupu a prístupu k IKT aktívam podporujúcim kritické alebo dôležité funkcie, ktoré sú verejne dostupné.
|
Prepojené úlohy
- 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.
|