+Threat Intelligence Program

Threat Intelligence Program

Description

Mechanisms exist to implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Subscribe to free threat intelligence feeds (e.g., CISA alerts)

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

∙ CISA alerts subscription
∙ Basic threat awareness program

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

∙ Threat intelligence program

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

∙ Threat intelligence program

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

∙ Threat intelligence 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

Threat Management (THR) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with THR domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Threat management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel subscribe to threat feeds to maintain situational awareness of emerging threats.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

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

Threat Management (THR) 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 THR 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 THR domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A threat management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain THR domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of threat management operations (e.g., threat intelligence solution and bug bounty 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 THR 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 implement a threat intelligence program that includes a cross-organization information-sharing capability that can influence the development of the system and security architectures, selection of security solutions, monitoring, threat hunting, response and recovery activities.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Threat Management (THR) 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. Pregled

1.1 Sklici

1.2 Ugotovljene zahteve

1.3 Povezani predpisi

2. Ugotovljene zahteve

Zahteve

3. Povezani predpisi

Predpisi
EULAW Člen 2 Splošni elementi varnostnih politik, postopkov, protokolov in orodij na področju IKT
-
EULAW Člen 3 Obvladovanje tveganj na področju IKT

Člen 3

Obvladovanje tveganj na področju IKT

Finančni subjekti razvijejo, dokumentirajo in izvajajo politike in postopke za obvladovanje tveganj na področju IKT, ki vsebujejo vse naslednje:

(a) 

navedbo odobritve tolerančne ravni tveganja za tveganje na področju IKT, določene v skladu s členom 6(8), točka (b), Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554;

(b) 

postopek in metodologijo za izvedbo ocene tveganja na področju IKT, v katerih so opredeljeni:

(i) 

ranljivosti in grožnje, ki vplivajo ali bi lahko vplivale na podprte poslovne funkcije, sisteme IKT in sredstva IKT, ki podpirajo te funkcije;

(ii) 

kvantitativni ali kvalitativni kazalniki za merjenje učinka in verjetnosti ranljivosti in groženj iz točke (i);

(c) 

postopek za opredelitev, izvajanje in dokumentiranje ukrepov za obravnavo tveganj na področju IKT za identificirana in ocenjena tveganja na področju IKT, vključno z določitvijo ukrepov za obravnavo tveganj na področju IKT, potrebnih za uskladitev tveganja na področju IKT s tolerančno ravnjo tveganja iz točke (a);

(d) 

za preostala tveganja na področju IKT, ki so še vedno prisotna po izvajanju ukrepov za obravnavo tveganj na področju IKT iz točke (c):

(i) 

določbe o identifikaciji teh preostalih tveganj na področju IKT;

(ii) 

dodelitev vlog in odgovornosti v zvezi s:

(1) 

sprejetjem preostalih tveganj na področju IKT, ki presegajo tolerančno raven tveganja finančnega subjekta iz točke (a);

(2) 

postopkom pregleda iz točke (iv) te točke (d);

(iii) 

pripravo popisa sprejetih preostalih tveganj na področju IKT, vključno z utemeljitvijo njihovega sprejetja;

(iv) 

določbe o pregledu sprejetih preostalih tveganj na področju IKT vsaj enkrat letno, vključno z:

(1) 

identifikacijo vseh sprememb preostalih tveganj na področju IKT;

(2) 

oceno razpoložljivih blažilnih ukrepov;

(3) 

oceno, ali so razlogi, ki upravičujejo sprejetje preostalih tveganj na področju IKT, še vedno veljavni in se uporabljajo na datum pregleda;

(e) 

določbe o spremljanju:

(i) 

vseh sprememb tveganja na področju IKT in okolja kibernetskih groženj;

(ii) 

notranjih in zunanjih ranljivosti in groženj;

(iii) 

tveganja finančnega subjekta na področju IKT, ki omogoča hitro odkrivanje sprememb, ki bi lahko vplivale na njegov profil tveganja na področju IKT;

(f) 

določbe o postopku za zagotovitev, da se upoštevajo vse spremembe poslovne strategije in strategije za digitalno operativno odpornost finančnega subjekta.

Za namene prvega odstavka, točka (c), postopek iz navedene točke zagotavlja:

(a) 

spremljanje učinkovitosti izvedenih ukrepov za obravnavo tveganj na področju IKT;

(b) 

oceno, ali so bile dosežene določene tolerančne ravni tveganja finančnega subjekta;

(c) 

oceno, ali je finančni subjekt sprejel ukrepe za popravek ali izboljšanje navedenih ukrepov, kadar je potrebno.
EULAW Člen 23 Odkrivanje neobičajnega ravnanja ter merila za odkrivanje incidentov, povezanih z IKT, in odzivanje nanje
-
EULAW Člen 31 Obvladovanje tveganj na področju IKT
-
EULAW Člen 34 Varnost delovanja IKT

Člen 34

Varnost delovanja IKT

Finančni subjekti iz člena 16(1) Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554 v okviru svojih sistemov, protokolov in orodij ter za vsa sredstva IKT:

(a) 

spremljajo in upravljajo življenjski cikel vseh sredstev IKT;

(b) 

spremljajo, ali sredstva IKT podpirajo tretji ponudniki storitev IKT finančnih subjektov, kadar je ustrezno;

(c) 

opredelijo zahteve glede zmogljivostih svojih sredstev IKT in ukrepe za ohranjanje in izboljšanje razpoložljivosti in učinkovitosti sistemov IKT ter preprečevanje pomanjkanja zmogljivosti IKT, preden se pojavi;

(d) 

izvajajo avtomatizirano pregledovanje in ocenjevanje ranljivosti sredstev IKT, in sicer sorazmerno z njihovo razvrstitvijo iz člena 30(1) in splošnim profilom tveganja sredstva IKT, ter uvedejo popravke za odpravo prepoznanih ranljivosti;

(e) 

obvladujejo tveganja, povezana z zastarelimi, nepodprtimi ali obstoječimi sredstvi IKT;

(f) 

beležijo dogodke, povezane z nadzorom logičnega in fizičnega dostopa, delovanjem IKT, v dnevnike, vključno z dejavnostmi v zvezi s sistemom in omrežnim prometom, ter upravljanjem sprememb na področju IKT;

(g) 

opredelijo in izvajajo ukrepe za spremljanje in analizo informacij o neobičajnem ravnanju in vedenju za kritično ali pomembno delovanje IKT;

(h) 

izvajajo ukrepe za spremljanje relevantnih in najnovejših informacij o kibernetskih grožnjah;

(i) 

izvajajo ukrepe za identifikacijo morebitnih uhajanj informacij, zlonamernih kod in drugih varnostnih groženj ter javno znanih ranljivosti v programski in strojni opremi ter preverjajo, ali obstajajo ustrezne nove varnostne posodobitve.

Za namene točke (f) finančni subjekti uskladijo raven podrobnosti dnevnikov z njihovim namenom in uporabo sredstev IKT, ki te dnevnike proizvajajo.
EULAW Člen 13 Učenje in razvoj
-
EULAW Člen 45 Dogovori o izmenjavi informacij in obveščevalnih podatkov o kibernetskih grožnjah
-
EULAW Article 13 1

1.   Financial entities shall have in place capabilities and staff to gather information on vulnerabilities and cyber threats, ICT-related incidents, in particular cyber-attacks, and analyse the impact they are likely to have on their digital operational resilience.
EULAW Article 45 1

1.   Financial entities may exchange amongst themselves cyber threat information and intelligence, including indicators of compromise, tactics, techniques, and procedures, cyber security alerts and configuration tools, to the extent that such information and intelligence sharing:

(a)

aims to enhance the digital operational resilience of financial entities, in particular through raising awareness in relation to cyber threats, limiting or impeding the cyber threats’ ability to spread, supporting defence capabilities, threat detection techniques, mitigation strategies or response and recovery stages;

(b)

takes places within trusted communities of financial entities;

(c)

is implemented through information-sharing arrangements that protect the potentially sensitive nature of the information shared, and that are governed by rules of conduct in full respect of business confidentiality, protection of personal data in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and guidelines on competition policy.
EULAW Article 45 2

2.   For the purpose of paragraph 1, point (c), the information-sharing arrangements shall define the conditions for participation and, where appropriate, shall set out the details on the involvement of public authorities and the capacity in which they may be associated to the information-sharing arrangements, on the involvement of ICT third-party service providers, and on operational elements, including the use of dedicated IT platforms.
EULAW Article 45 3

3.   Financial entities shall notify competent authorities of their participation in the information-sharing arrangements referred to in paragraph 1, upon validation of their membership, or, as applicable, of the cessation of their membership, once it takes effect.

Povezane zadeve

Povezave
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 08
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 Access
blocks Loss, Theft or Damage of Assets
blocks Unauthorized Retention / Inability to Dispose of Data
blocks Business / Service Interruption
blocks Data Loss / Integrity Compromise
blocks System / Data Compromise (Technical Vector)
blocks System / Data Compromise (Non-Technical Vector)
blocks Exposure from Unaddressed Vulnerabilities
blocks System / Service Compromise
blocks Failure to Support Business / Mission Objectives
blocks Unaddressed Security / Compliance Exposure
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 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 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
is related to Govern
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 Malicious Cyber Activity
blocks Utility Service Disruption
blocks Dysfunctional Management Practices
blocks Human Error
blocks Technical / Mechanical Failure
blocks Statutory / Regulatory / Contractual Change
blocks Data Quality Degradation / Data Poisoning
blocks Geopolitical Conflict / Government Intervention
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks Infrastructure Failure / Degradation
blocks OIS-05.01B
blocks OIS-05.03B
is blocked by THR-02 Threat Intelligence Program – Assessment Procedure
blocks PM-15 Security and Privacy Groups and Associations
blocks PM-16 Threat Awareness Program
blocks 03.11.02 Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning
blocks 03.14.01 Flaw Remediation
blocks 03.14.03 Security Alerts, Advisories, and Directives
blocks ID.RA-03 Internal and external threats to the organization are identified and recorded
blocks ID.RA-08 Processes for receiving, analyzing, and responding to vulnerability disclosures are established
blocks DE DETECT
blocks DE.AE-07 Cyber threat intelligence and other contextual information are integrated into the analysis