+Event Log & Security-Relevant Telemetry Retention
|
Event Log & Security-Relevant Telemetry Retention
Description
Mechanisms exist to retain event logs and security-relevant telemetry for a time period consistent with records retention requirements to provide support for after-the-fact investigations of security incidents and to meet statutory, regulatory and contractual retention requirements.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
∙ Log retention policy (minimum 90 days online, 1 year archived)
∙ Cloud log storage (e.g., AWS S3, Azure Storage)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
∙ Log retention policy (minimum 90 days online, 1 year archived)
∙ Cloud SIEM with configurable retention
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM) with defined retention schedules
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
∙ Log archiving to cold storage (e.g., AWS S3 Glacier, Azure Archive)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ SIEM with tiered log retention (hot/warm/cold storage)
∙ Log retention policy aligned to regulatory requirements (e.g., HIPAA 6 yrs, PCI DSS 1 yr)
∙ Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise log retention program aligned to all applicable regulations
∙ SIEM with tiered retention (hot/warm/cold storage)
∙ Immutable log archives (e.g., AWS S3 Object Lock, Azure Blob WORM)
∙ Legal hold capability for investigation support
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
Continuous Monitoring (MON) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with MON domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Event monitoring-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Monitoring is primarily reactive in nature, focused on identifying incidents that occurred.
▪ Event log reviews primarily rely on manual processes to identify anomalous behaviors.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 MON domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with MON 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 MON domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Continuous monitoring-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Continuous monitoring 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
Continuous Monitoring (MON) 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 MON domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Cybersecurity personnel use a structured process via Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) to review and analyze logs.
▪ A Security Operations Center (SOC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain MON domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of continuous monitoring operations (e.g., Security Incident Event Manager (SIEM)).
▪ 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 MON 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).
▪ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) enforce security event logging to contain sufficient information to establish necessary details of activity and allow for forensics analysis.
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to retain event logs for a time period consistent with records retention requirements to provide support for after-the-fact investigations of security incidents and to meet statutory, regulatory and contractual retention 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. Pregled
1.1 Sklici
1.2 Ugotovljene zahteve
1.3 Povezani predpisi
2. Ugotovljene zahteve
3. Povezani predpisi
Predpisi
| Vir |
Regulativa |
|
EULAW
|
Člen 19 Samodejno ustvarjeni dnevniki
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Člen 19 Samodejno ustvarjeni dnevniki
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Člen 8 Politike in postopki za delovanje IKT
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Člen 12 Beleženje v dnevnike
-
|
|
EULAW
|
Člen 21 Nadzor dostopa
Člen 21
Finančni subjekti v okviru svojega nadzora pravic upravljanja dostopa razvijejo, dokumentirajo in izvajajo politiko, ki vsebuje vse naslednje:
(a)
dodelitev pravic dostopa do sredstev IKT na podlagi načel potrebe po seznanitvi, potrebe po uporabi in delovanja ob najmanjših privilegijih, vključno za oddaljeni dostop in dostop v sili;
(b)
ločevanje nalog, zasnovano za preprečevanje neupravičenega dostopa do kritičnih podatkov ali preprečevanje dodelitve kombinacij pravic dostopa, ki se lahko uporabijo za izogibanje kontrolam;
(c)
določbo o sledljivosti aktivnosti uporabniškega računa, tako da se čim bolj omeji uporaba generičnih in skupnih uporabniških računov ter zagotovi, da je uporabnike vedno mogoče prepoznati za dejanja, ki se izvajajo v sistemih IKT;
(d)
določbo o omejitvah dostopa do sredstev IKT, ki določa kontrole in orodja za preprečevanje nepooblaščenega dostopa;
(e)
postopke za upravljanje računov za podelitev, spremembo ali preklic pravic dostopa za uporabniške in generične račune, tudi za generične skrbniške račune, vključno z določbami o vsem naslednjem:
(i)
dodelitvi vlog in odgovornosti za podeljevanje, pregled in preklic pravic dostopa;
(ii)
dodelitvi prednostnega, nujnega in skrbniškega dostopa na podlagi potrebe po uporabi ali na priložnostni podlagi za vse sisteme IKT;
(iii)
odvzemu pravic dostopa brez nepotrebnega odlašanja ob prenehanju delovnega razmerja ali ko dostop ni več potreben;
(iv)
posodobitvi pravic dostopa, kadar so potrebne spremembe in vsaj enkrat letno za vse sisteme IKT, razen sistemov IKT, ki podpirajo kritične ali pomembne funkcije, in vsaj vsakih šest mesecev za sisteme IKT, ki podpirajo kritične ali pomembne funkcije;
(f)
metode avtentikacije, vključno z vsem naslednjim:
(i)
uporabo metod avtentikacije, ki so sorazmerne z razvrstitvijo, določeno v skladu s členom 8(1) Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554, in splošnim profilom tveganja sredstev IKT ter ob upoštevanju vodilnih praks;
(ii)
uporabo metod močne avtentikacije za oddaljeni dostop do omrežja finančnega subjekta, za prednostni dostop, za dostop do sredstev IKT, ki podpirajo kritične ali pomembne funkcije, ali sredstev IKT, ki so javno dostopna, v skladu z vodilnimi praksami in tehnikami;
(g)
ukrepe za nadzor fizičnega dostopa, ki vključujejo:
(i)
identifikacijo in evidentiranje fizičnih oseb, ki so pooblaščene za dostop do prostorov, podatkovnih centrov in občutljivih namenskih območij, ki jih določi finančni subjekt, kjer so nameščena sredstva IKT in informacijska sredstva;
(ii)
podelitev pravic fizičnega dostopa do ključnih sredstev IKT samo pooblaščenim osebam v skladu z načelom potrebe po seznanitvi in načelom delovanja ob najmanjših privilegijih ter na priložnostni podlagi;
(iii)
spremljanje fizičnega dostopa do prostorov, podatkovnih centrov in občutljivih namenskih območij, ki jih določi finančni subjekt, kjer so nameščena sredstva IKT in informacijska sredstva ali oboje;
(iv)
pregled pravic fizičnega dostopa, da se zagotovi takojšen preklic nepotrebnih pravic dostopa.
Za namene točke (e)(i) finančni subjekti določijo obdobje hrambe, pri čemer upoštevajo poslovne cilje in cilje glede informacijske varnosti, razloge za zabeleženje dogodka v dnevnike in rezultate ocene tveganja na področju IKT.
Za namene točke (e)(ii) finančni subjekti, kadar je to mogoče, uporabljajo namenske račune za izvajanje skrbniških nalog v zvezi s sistemi IKT. Kadar je to izvedljivo in primerno, finančni subjekti uvedejo avtomatizirane rešitve za upravljanje prednostnega dostopa.
Za namene točke (g)(i) sta identifikacija in evidentiranje sorazmerna s pomembnostjo prostorov, podatkovnih centrov in občutljivih namenskih območij ter kritičnostjo operacij ali sistemov IKT, ki se nahajajo v njih.
Za namene točke (g)(iii) je spremljanje sorazmerno z razvrstitvijo, določeno v skladu s členom 8(1) Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554, in kritičnostjo območja, do katerega se dostopa.
|
|
EULAW
|
Člen 22 Politika obvladovanja incidentov, povezanih z IKT
Člen 22
Politika obvladovanja incidentov, povezanih z IKT
Finančni subjekti v okviru mehanizmov za odkrivanje neobičajnega ravnanja, vključno s težavami v zvezi z zmogljivostjo omrežja IKT in incidenti, povezanimi z IKT, razvijejo, dokumentirajo in izvajajo politiko glede incidentov, povezanih z IKT, s katero:
(a)
dokumentirajo postopek obvladovanja incidentov, povezanih z IKT, iz člena 17 Uredbe (EU) 2022/2554;
(b)
pripravijo seznam ustreznih stikov z notranjimi funkcijami in zunanjimi deležniki, ki so neposredno vključeni v varnost delovanja IKT, vključno z:
(i)
odkrivanjem in spremljanjem kibernetskih groženj;
(ii)
odkrivanjem neobičajnega ravnanja;
(iii)
upravljanjem ranljivosti;
(c)
vzpostavijo, izvajajo in upravljajo tehnične, organizacijske in operativne mehanizme za podporo postopku obvladovanja incidentov, povezanih z IKT, vključno z mehanizmi, ki omogočajo takojšnje odkrivanje neobičajnega ravnanja in vedenja v skladu s členom 23 te uredbe;
▼C1
(d)
hranijo vse dokaze v zvezi z incidenti, povezanimi z IKT, za obdobje, ki ni daljše, kot je potrebno za namene, za katere se zbirajo podatki, sorazmerno s kritičnostjo prizadetih poslovnih funkcij, podpornih postopkov ter sredstev IKT in informacijskih sredstev, v skladu s členom 8(2) Delegirane uredbe Komisije (EU) 2024/1772 (
2
), in vsemi veljavnimi zahtevami glede hrambe v skladu s pravom Unije;
▼B
(e)
vzpostavijo in izvajajo mehanizme za analizo pomembnih ali ponavljajočih se incidentov, povezanih z IKT, ter vzorcev v številu in pojavljanju incidentov, povezanih z IKT.
Za namene točke (d) finančni subjekti varno hranijo dokaze iz navedene točke.
|
Povezane zadeve
- 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.
|