+Defined Roles & Responsibilities
---+Assigned Roles & Responsibilities Awareness

Defined Roles & Responsibilities

Description

Mechanisms exist to define cybersecurity roles & responsibilities for all personnel.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment
∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix

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

∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment
∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix

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

∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment
∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix

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

∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment
∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix

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

∙ NIST NICE cybersecurity workforce framework alignment
∙ Responsible, Accountable, Supporting, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) matrix

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

Human Resources Security (HRS) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with HRS domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Personnel management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ The Human Resources (HR) department provides guidance on secure HR practices for hiring, retaining and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.
▪ Formal roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity and/or data protection are not consistent and/or standardized.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization.
▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.

Level 3 Well Defined

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software 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 HRS 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 define cybersecurity roles & responsibilities for all personnel.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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. Översikt

Assigned Roles & Responsibilities Awareness

Description

Mechanisms exist to communicate with users about their roles and responsibilities to maintain a safe and secure working environment.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

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

∙ Formal onboarding training
∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)

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

∙ Formal onboarding training
∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)

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

∙ Formal onboarding training
∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)

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

∙ Formal onboarding training
∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)

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

∙ Formal onboarding training
∙ Acceptable Use / Rules of Behavior (RoB)

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

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Personnel management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Personnel management is decentralized at a localized/regionalized function, where there are non-standardized methods to govern personnel matters across the organization.
▪ Localized HR practices are implemented for hiring, managing, training, investigating and terminating employees, contractors and other personnel that work on behalf of the organization.

Level 3 Well Defined

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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 HRS 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 HRS domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Human Resources (HR) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain HRS domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of human resources security operations (e.g., personnel management software 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 HRS 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 communicate with users about their roles and responsibilities to maintain a safe and secure working environment.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Human Resources Security (HRS) 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.

1.1 Referenser

1.2 Identifierade krav

1.3 Relaterade regleringar

2. Identifierade krav

Krav

3. Relaterade regleringar

Regleringar
EULAW Artikel 2 Allmänna delar av IKT-relaterade säkerhetsstrategier, förfaranden, protokoll och verktyg
-
EULAW Artikel 15 IKT-projekthantering
-
EULAW Artikel 17 Hantering av IKT-förändringar
-
EULAW Artikel 19 Personalpolitik

Artikel 19

Personalpolitik

Finansiella entiteter ska i sin personalpolitik eller andra relevanta policyer inkludera alla följande IKT-säkerhetsrelaterade delar:

a) 

Identifiering och fördelning av alla specifika ansvarsområden för IKT-säkerhet.

b) 

Krav för personal hos den finansiella entiteten och hos tredjepartsleverantörer av IKT-tjänster som använder eller har åtkomst till den finansiella entitetens IKT-tillgångar att

i) 

vara informerad om, och följa, den finansiella entitetens IKT-relaterade säkerhetsstrategier, förfaranden och protokoll,

ii) 

vara medveten om de rapporteringskanaler som inrättats av den finansiella entiteten för att upptäcka onormalt beteende, inklusive, i tillämpliga fall, de rapporteringskanaler som inrättats i linje med Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv (EU) 2019/1937 ( 1 ),

iii) 

när anställningen upphör, till den finansiella entiteten återlämna alla IKT-tillgångar och materiella informationstillgångar som den innehar och som tillhör den finansiella entiteten.
EULAW Artikel 21 Åtkomstkontroll

Artikel 21

Åtkomstkontroll

Som en del av sin kontroll av rättigheter till åtkomsthantering ska finansiella entiteter utarbeta, dokumentera och genomföra en policy som innehåller allt av följande:

a) 

Tilldelning av åtkomsträttigheter till IKT-tillgångar baserat på principerna om behovsenlig behörighet, behovsenlig användning och minsta möjliga behörighet, inklusive för fjärråtkomst och nödåtkomst.

b) 

Åtskillnad av arbetsuppgifter för att förhindra omotiverad åtkomst till kritiska uppgifter eller för att förhindra tilldelning av kombinationer av åtkomsträttigheter som kan användas för att kringgå kontroller.

c) 

En bestämmelse om användares ansvarsskyldighet, genom att i möjligaste mån begränsa användningen av generiska och delade användarkonton och säkerställa att användarna alltid kan identifieras när åtgärder utförs i IKT-systemen.

d) 

En bestämmelse om begränsningar av åtkomst till IKT-tillgångar, med angivande av kontroller och verktyg för att förhindra obehörig åtkomst.

e) 

Förfaranden för kontohantering för att bevilja, ändra eller återkalla åtkomsträttigheter för användarkonton och generiska konton, även generiska administratörskonton, inklusive bestämmelser om

i) 

tilldelning av roller och ansvarsområden för att bevilja, granska och återkalla åtkomsträttigheter,

ii) 

tilldelning av privilegierad åtkomst, nödåtkomst och administratörsåtkomst efter behov eller från fall till fall och för samtliga IKT-system,

iii) 

återkallande av åtkomsträttigheter utan onödigt dröjsmål när anställningen upphör eller när åtkomsten inte längre är nödvändig,

iv) 

uppdatering av åtkomsträttigheter när ändringar krävs och minst en gång per år för samtliga IKT-system, utom för IKT-system som stöder kritiska eller viktiga funktioner där uppdateringen ska ske minst var sjätte månad.

f) 

Autentiseringsmetoder, inklusive

i) 

användning av autentiseringsmetoder som står i proportion till den klassificering som fastställts i enlighet med artikel 8.1 i förordning (EU) 2022/2554 och till IKT-tillgångarnas allmänna riskprofil och med beaktande av ledande praxis,

ii) 

användning av robusta metoder för autentisering i enlighet med ledande praxis och teknik för fjärråtkomst till den finansiella entitetens nätverk, för privilegierad åtkomst och för åtkomst till IKT-tillgångar som stöder kritiska eller viktiga funktioner eller IKT-tillgångar som är allmänt tillgängliga.

g) 

Åtgärder för fysisk åtkomstkontroll, inklusive

i) 

identifiering och loggning av fysiska personer som är behöriga att få tillträde till lokaler, datacentraler och känsliga angivna områden som identifierats av den finansiella entiteten där IKT-tillgångar och informationstillgångar finns,

ii) 

beviljande av fysiska åtkomsträttigheter till kritiska IKT-tillgångar endast för behöriga personer, i enlighet med principerna om behovsenlig behörighet och minsta möjliga behörighet, och från fall till fall,

iii) 

övervakning av fysiskt tillträde till lokaler, datacentraler och känsliga angivna områden som identifierats av den finansiella entiteten där IKT-tillgångar och informationstillgångar eller bådadera finns,

iv) 

granskning av fysiska åtkomsträttigheter för att säkerställa att onödiga åtkomsträttigheter omedelbart återkallas.

Vid tillämpning av led e i ska finansiella entiteter fastställa lagringstiden med beaktande av verksamhets- och informationssäkerhetsmålen, skälen till att händelsen registreras i loggarna och resultaten av IKT-riskbedömningen.

Vid tillämpning av led e ii ska finansiella entiteter, när så är möjligt, använda särskilda konton för att utföra administrativa uppgifter på IKT-system. När så är möjligt och lämpligt ska finansiella entiteter införa automatiserade lösningar för hantering av privilegierad åtkomst.

Vid tillämpning av led g i ska identifieringen och loggningen stå i proportion till hur viktiga lokalerna, datacentralerna och de känsliga angivna områdena är och hur kritiska de verksamheter eller IKT-system som finns där är.

Vid tillämpning av led g iii ska övervakningen stå i proportion till den klassificering som fastställts i enlighet med artikel 8.1 i förordning (EU) 2022/2554 och hur kritiskt det område är till vilket åtkomst ges.
EULAW Artikel 23 Upptäckt av onormal verksamhet och kriterier för upptäckt och hantering av IKT-relaterade incidenter
-
EULAW Artikel 28 Styrning och organisation
-
EULAW Artikel 5 Styrning och organisation
-
EULAW Artikel 32 Säkerhet i samband med behandlingen
-
EULAW Artikel 5 2

2.   Den finansiella entitetens ledningsorgan ska fastställa, godkänna, övervaka och ansvara för genomförandet av alla arrangemang som rör den IKT-riskhanteringsram som avses i artikel 6.1.

Vid tillämpning av det första stycket ska ledningsorganet

a)

ha det slutliga ansvaret för att hantera den finansiella entitetens IKT-risk,

b)

införa strategier som syftar till att säkerställa bibehållandet av höga standarder för tillgänglighet, äkthet, integritet och konfidentialitet för data,

c)

fastställa tydliga roller och ansvarsområden för alla IKT-relaterade funktioner och inrätta lämpliga styrformer för att säkerställa kommunikation, samarbete och samordning på ett effektivt och skyndsamt sätt mellan dessa funktioner,

d)

ha det övergripande ansvaret för att fastställa och godkänna strategin för digital operativ motståndskraft enligt artikel 6.8, inbegripet fastställandet av en lämplig risktoleransnivå för IKT-risk för den finansiella entiteten, enligt vad som avses i artikel 6.8 b,

e)

godkänna, övervaka och regelbundet se över genomförandet av den IKT-kontinuitetspolicy och de åtgärds- och återställningsplaner avseende IKT för den finansiella entiteten som avses i artikel 11.1 respektive 11.3, vilka kan antas som särskilda specifika planer och utgöra integrerade delar av den finansiella entitetens övergripande kontinuitetsplan och åtgärds- och återställningsplan,

f)

godkänna och regelbundet se över den finansiella entitetens IKT-internrevisionsplaner, IKT-revisioner och väsentliga ändringar av dessa,

g)

anslå och regelbundet se över den lämpliga budgeten för att uppfylla den finansiella entitetens behov av digital operativ motståndskraft när det gäller alla typer av resurser, inbegripet relevanta program för medvetenhet om IKT-säkerhet och sådan utbildning om digital operativ motståndskraft som avses i artikel 13.6 och IKT-färdigheter för all personal,

h)

godkänna och regelbundet se över den finansiella entitetens riktlinjer för arrangemang vad gäller användningen av IKT-tjänster som tillhandahålls av tredjepartsleverantörer av IKT-tjänster,

i)

på verksamhetsnivå etablera rapporteringskanaler som gör det möjligt att vederbörligen informeras om

i)

arrangemang som har ingåtts med tredjepartsleverantörer av IKT-tjänster om användningen av IKT-tjänster,

ii)

alla relevanta planerade väsentliga ändringar som rör tredjepartsleverantörerna av IKT-tjänster,

iii)

den potentiella effekten av sådana ändringar på de kritiska eller viktiga funktioner som omfattas av dessa arrangemang, inbegripet en sammanfattning av riskanalysen för att bedöma effekterna av dessa ändringar och åtminstone allvarliga IKT-relaterade incidenter och deras inverkan liksom åtgärder, återställande och korrigerande åtgärder.

Länkade ärenden

Länkar
is related to Annual
is related to relative Control Weighting = 10
is related to People
is related to Identify
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 2 OPERATIONAL
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 3 TACTICAL
blocks Excessive or Unauthorized Privilege
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 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
is related to SCRM Focus Tier 1 STRATEGIC
blocks Inability to Demonstrate Due Diligence / Due Care
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 Fraud, Corruption and/or Intentional Criminal Conduct
blocks Conflict of Interest (COI) / Undue Influence / Insider Misconduct
blocks Workforce Shortage / Loss of Critical Skills / Labor Disruption
blocks SP-01.01B
blocks OPS-10.01B
blocks OPS-32.03B
is blocked by HRS-04 Defined Roles & Responsibilities – Assessment Procedure
blocks PM-13 Security and Privacy Workforce
blocks PS-09 Position Descriptions
blocks PS-09 [L] Position Descriptions
blocks PS-09 [M] Position Descriptions
blocks PS-09 [H] Position Descriptions
blocks PM-13 [P] Security and Privacy Workforce
blocks 03.01.22 Publicly Accessible Content
blocks 03.02.02 Role-Based Training
blocks 03.06.04 Incident Response Training
blocks 03.06.05 Incident Response Plan
blocks 03.07.06 Maintenance Personnel
blocks 03.08.02 Media Access
blocks 03.15.03 Rules of Behavior
blocks 03.16.03 External System Services
blocks GV.RM-05 Lines of communication across the organization are established for cybersecurity risks, including risks from suppliers and other third parties
blocks GV.RR Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities
blocks GV.RR-02 Roles, responsibilities, and authorities related to cybersecurity risk management are established, communicated, understood, and enforced
blocks ID.AM Asset Management
blocks PO.2 Implement Roles and Responsibilities
blocks PO.2.1 Create new roles and alter responsibilities for existing roles as needed to encompass all parts of the SDLC. Periodically review and maintain the …
  • 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.