+Člen 41 Skupne specifikacije
---+Člen 41 1.
---+Člen 41 2.
---+Člen 41 3.
---+Člen 41 4.
---+Člen 41 5.
---+Člen 41 6.

Člen 41 Skupne specifikacije

-

1. Pregled

,
Člen 41 1.

Komisija lahko sprejme izvedbene akte o določitvi skupnih specifikacij za zahteve iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, za obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V, kadar so izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:

(a) 

Komisija je na podlagi člena 10(1) Uredbe (EU) št. 1025/2012 zahtevala, da ena ali več evropskih organizacij za standardizacijo pripravi osnutek harmoniziranega standarda za zahteve iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, za obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V, in:

(i) 

zahteve ni sprejela nobena evropska organizacija za standardizacijo ali

(ii) 

harmonizirani standardi, ki se nanašajo na to zahtevo, niso bili predloženi v roku, določenem v skladu s členom 10(1) Uredbe (EU) št. 1025/2012, ali

(iii) 

v ustreznih harmoniziranih standardih so nezadostno obravnavani pomisleki glede temeljnih pravic ali

(iv) 

harmonizirani standardi niso skladni z zahtevo ter

(b) 

v Uradnem listu Evropske unije v skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 1025/2012 ni objavljen sklic na harmonizirane standarde, ki zajemajo zahteve iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V, in objava takega sklica se v razumnem roku tudi ne pričakuje.

Pri pripravi skupnih specifikacij se Komisija posvetuje s svetovalnim forumom iz člena 67.

Izvedbeni akti iz prvega pododstavka tega odstavka se sprejmejo v skladu s postopkom pregleda iz člena 98(2).
Člen 41 2.
Komisija pred pripravo osnutka izvedbenega akta obvesti odbor iz člena 22 Uredbe (EU) št. 1025/2012, da meni, da so pogoji iz odstavka 1 tega člena izpolnjeni.
Člen 41 3.
Za visokotvegane sisteme UI ali modele UI za splošne namene, ki so v skladu s skupnimi specifikacijami iz odstavka 1 ali deli navedenih specifikacij, se domneva, da so skladni z zahtevami iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, izpolnjujejo zahteve iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V, kolikor so te zajete v teh skupnih specifikacijah ali teh obveznostih.
Člen 41 4.
Kadar evropska organizacija za standardizacijo sprejme harmonizirani standard in ga predloži Komisiji, da se sklic nanj objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, Komisija harmonizirani standard oceni v skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 1025/2012. Ko se sklic na harmonizirani standard objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, Komisija razveljavi izvedbene akte iz odstavka 1 ali njihove dele, ki zajemajo zahteve, enake zahtevam iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, iste obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V.
Člen 41 5.
Kadar ponudniki visokotveganih sistemov UI ali modelov UI za splošne namene ne izpolnjujejo skupnih specifikacij iz odstavka 1, ustrezno utemeljijo, da so sprejeli tehnične rešitve, ki izpolnjujejo zahteve iz oddelka 2 tega poglavja ali, kot je ustrezno, izpolnjujejo obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V v tolikšni meri, da so jim vsaj enakovredne.
Člen 41 6.
Kadar država članica meni, da skupna specifikacija ne izpolnjuje v celoti zahtev iz oddelka 2 ali, kot je ustrezno, ne izpolnjuje obveznosti iz oddelkov 2 in 3 poglavja V, o tem s podrobno obrazložitvijo obvesti Komisijo. Komisija te informacije oceni in po potrebi spremeni izvedbeni akt o določitvi zadevne skupne specifikacije.

1.1 Sklici

1.2 Ugotovljene zahteve

1.3 Povezani standardi

2. Ugotovljene zahteve

Zahteve

3. Povezani standardi

Standardi
SCF Non-Conformity Oversight

Description

Mechanisms exist to identify and document instances of non-conformity with statutory, regulatory and/or contractual obligations, in order to develop appropriate risk mitigation actions.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

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

∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

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

∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

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

∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

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

∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

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

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Compliance management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Compliance management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ External compliance requirements for cybersecurity and data privacy are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity perform an informal annual review of existing compliance requirements and research evolving or new requirements.

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ 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 CPL 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 document and review instances of non-compliance with statutory, regulatory and/or contractual obligations to develop appropriate risk mitigation actions.

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.