+Risk Management Policy

Risk Management Policy

Description

Mechanisms exist to establish a formal, documented risk management policy that:
(1) Conveys executive management's intent;
(2) Provides organizational direction and expected behaviors;
(3) Is reviewed at least annually; and
(4) Is updated, as necessary, to adapt to evolving risks, threats and other changes that affect the organization.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com)
∙ Executive-approved written policy with documented annual review

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

∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com)
∙ Executive-approved written policy with documented annual review
∙ Policy acknowledgement tracking (e.g., HR onboarding records)

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

∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com)
∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.) for policy lifecycle management
∙ Documented annual policy review with version control

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

∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com)
∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.) for policy lifecycle management
∙ Policy governance committee with formal annual review and approval workflow
∙ Automated policy attestation and acknowledgement tracking

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

∙ Steering committee
∙ ComplianceForge - Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) (https://complianceforge.com)
∙ Enterprise GRC platform (e.g., Cyturus, Archer, MetricStream, ServiceNow IRM) for policy lifecycle management
∙ Automated policy attestation, exception tracking and change history
∙ Annual executive approval and board-level reporting

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

Risk Management (RSK) 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 RSK domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with RSK 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 RSK domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Risk management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Risk management 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

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).

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 6 1

1.   Finančné subjekty musia mať ako súčasť svojho celkového systému riadenia rizika zavedený spoľahlivý, komplexný a dobre zdokumentovaný rámec riadenia IKT rizika, ktorý im umožňuje riešiť IKT riziko rýchlo, efektívne a komplexne a zabezpečiť vysokú úroveň digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti.
EULAW Článok 6 2

2.   Rámec riadenia IKT rizika zahŕňa aspoň stratégie, politiky, postupy, IKT protokoly a nástroje, ktoré sú potrebné na riadnu a primeranú ochranu všetkých informačných aktív a IKT aktív vrátane počítačového softvéru, hardvéru, serverov, ako aj ochranu všetkých relevantných fyzických zložiek a infraštruktúr, ako sú priestory, dátové centrá a citlivé určené oblasti s cieľom zabezpečiť, aby boli všetky informačné aktíva a IKT aktíva primerane chránené pred rizikami vrátane poškodenia a neoprávneného prístupu či používania.
EULAW Článok 6 3

3.   Finančné subjekty v súlade so svojím rámcom riadenia IKT rizika minimalizujú vplyv IKT rizika zavedením vhodných stratégií, politík, postupov, IKT protokolov a nástrojov. Príslušným orgánom poskytujú na ich žiadosť úplné a aktualizované informácie o IKT riziku a o svojom rámci riadenia IKT rizika.
EULAW Článok 6 4

4.   Finančné subjekty iné než mikropodniky priradia zodpovednosť za riadenie IKT rizika a dozor nad ním kontrolnej funkcii a zabezpečia primeranú úroveň nezávislosti tejto kontrolnej funkcie, aby sa zabránilo konfliktom záujmov. Finančné subjekty zabezpečia primeranú segregáciu a nezávislosť riadiacich funkcií v oblasti IKT rizika, kontrolných funkcií a funkcií vnútorného auditu, a to na základe modelu troch línií obrany alebo na základe interného modelu riadenia rizík a kontroly.
EULAW Článok 6 5

5.   Rámec riadenia IKT rizika sa zdokumentuje a preskúma aspoň raz ročne, alebo pravidelne v prípade mikropodnikov, ako aj pri výskyte závažných incidentov súvisiacich s IKT, pričom sa riadi pokynmi alebo závermi dohľadu vyplývajúcimi z príslušných procesov testovania alebo auditu digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti. Na základe skúseností získaných pri vykonávaní a monitorovaní sa rámec neustále vylepšuje. Správa o preskúmaní rámca riadenia IKT rizika sa predkladá príslušnému orgánu na jeho žiadosť.
EULAW Článok 6 6

6.   Rámec riadenia IKT rizika finančných subjektov iných ako mikropodnikov podlieha pravidelnému vnútornému auditu vykonávanému audítormi v súlade s plánom auditu finančných subjektov. Títo audítori musia mať dostatočné znalosti, zručnosti a odborné znalosti v oblasti IKT rizika, ako aj primeranú nezávislosť. Frekvencia a zameranie auditov IKT musia zodpovedať IKT riziku daného finančného subjektu.
EULAW Článok 6 7

7.   Na základe záverov vnútorného audítorského preskúmania finančné subjekty zavedú formálny postup prijímania následných opatrení vrátane pravidiel včasného overovania a nápravy kritických zistení auditu IKT.
EULAW Článok 6 8

8.   Rámec riadenia IKT rizika zahŕňa stratégiu digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti, v ktorej sa stanoví spôsob vykonávania rámca. Na tento účel stratégia digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti zahŕňa metódy na riešenie IKT rizika a dosiahnutie konkrétnych cieľov IKT, a to prostredníctvom týchto prvkov:

a)

vysvetlenie, ako rámec riadenia IKT rizika podporuje obchodnú stratégiu a ciele finančného subjektu;

b)

stanovenie úrovne tolerancie rizika v prípade IKT rizika v súlade s ochotou finančného subjektu podstupovať riziko a analýza tolerancie vplyvu narušení v oblasti IKT;

c)

stanovenie jasných cieľov informačnej bezpečnosti vrátane kľúčových ukazovateľov výkonnosti a kľúčových ukazovateľov rizika;

d)

vysvetlenie referenčnej architektúry IKT a akýchkoľvek zmien potrebných na dosiahnutie konkrétnych obchodných cieľov;

e)

načrtnutie rôznych mechanizmov zavedených na účely odhaľovania incidentov súvisiacich s IKT, prevencie ich vplyvu a poskytnutie ochrany pred ním;

f)

preukázanie súčasnej situácie v oblasti digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti na základe počtu nahlásených závažných incidentov súvisiacich s IKT a účinnosti preventívnych opatrení;

g)

vykonávanie testovania digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti v súlade s kapitolou IV tohto nariadenia;

h)

stanovenie komunikačnej stratégie v prípade incidentov súvisiacich s IKT, ktorých zverejnenie sa vyžaduje v súlade s článkom 14.
EULAW Článok 6 9

9.   Finančné subjekty môžu v súvislosti so stratégiou digitálnej prevádzkovej odolnosti uvedenou v odseku 8 vymedziť holistickú stratégiu viacerých dodávateľov IKT, a to na úrovni skupiny alebo subjekt, ktorá preukazuje kľúčové závislosti od externých poskytovateľov IKT služieb a vysvetľuje dôvody, na ktorých je založený príslušný obstarávací mix externých poskytovateľov služieb.
EULAW Článok 6 10

10.   Finančné subjekty môžu v súlade s právom Únie a vnútroštátnym odvetvovým právom zadať úlohy overovania súladu s požiadavkami na riadenie IKT rizika vnútroskupinovým alebo externým podnikom formou outsourcingu. V prípade takéhoto outsourcingu zostáva finančný subjekt plne zodpovedný za overovanie súladu s požiadavkami na riadenie IKT rizika.
EULAW Článok 11 6

6.   Finančné subjekty v rámci svojho komplexného riadenia IKT rizika:

a)

testujú plány kontinuity činností v oblasti IKT a plány reakcie a obnovy v oblasti IKT vo vzťahu k IKT systémom podporujúcim všetky funkcie aspoň raz ročne, ako aj v prípade akýchkoľvek podstatných zmien IKT systémov podporujúcich kritické alebo dôležité funkcie;

b)

testujú plány krízovej komunikácie vypracované v súlade s článkom 14.

Na účely prvého pododseku písm. a) finančné subjekty iné než mikropodniky zahrnú do testovacích plánov scenáre kybernetických útokov a prepnutia medzi primárnou infraštruktúrou IKT a redundantnou kapacitou, zálohami a redundantnými zariadeniami potrebnými na splnenie povinností stanovených v článku 12.

Finančné subjekty pravidelne preskúmavajú svoju politiku kontinuity činností v oblasti IKT a plány reakcie a obnovy v oblasti IKT, pričom zohľadňujú výsledky testov vykonaných v súlade s prvým pododsekom a odporúčania vyplývajúce z audítorských kontrol alebo preskúmaní orgánmi dohľadu.
EULAW Článok 32 Bezpečnosť spracúvania
-
EULAW Článok 21 Opatrenia na riadenie kybernetických rizík
-

Prepojené úlohy

Prepojenia
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to Process
is related to Govern
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 Loss of Accountability / Attribution
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
blocks Unauthorized Privilege Elevation
blocks Unauthorized Access
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Modification / Loss of System Integrity
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks Reduced Operational Productivity
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Revenue Loss
blocks Contractual Default / Termination
blocks Loss of Competitive Advantage
blocks Reputational Harm / Loss of Stakeholder Trust
blocks Regulatory / Legal / Contractual Financial Liability
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
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 Harm from Illegal, Abusive or Unsafe Content / Conduct
blocks Loss of Investigative / Evidentiary Capability
blocks Delayed Containment / Increased Incident Impact
blocks Incident Persistence / Recurrence
blocks Incident Response / Recovery Cost
blocks Undetected / Delayed Detection of Adverse Activity
blocks Lack of a security-minded workforce
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 Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
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 Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OIS-07.01B
blocks Loss of Authorization / Certification / License
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
blocks Unreliable Assurance / Decision Information
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 Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks OIS-07.01B
is blocked by RSK-01 Risk Management Policy – Assessment Procedure
blocks GV GOVERN
blocks GV.PO-02 Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is reviewed, updated, communicated, and enforced to reflect changes in requirements, threats, technology, and …
  • 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.