NIST Proposes Update to Cybersecurity Framework to Address Service Provider Oversight

Many investment advisers and broker-dealers have embraced the NIST Cybersecurity Framework since it was first released in 2014, using it to formalize the mapping of risks and controls as part of a comprehensive cybersecurity program. Alas, cybersecurity risks continue to grow, and so too must the response to those risks keep pace. What has become clear from the SEC’s cybersecurity enforcement actions to date is that vendors and service providers to advisers and broker-dealers have access to a wealth of information and data about a firm and its clients, and that a breach or security incident involving the service provider can have privacy impacts for the IA or BD.

Recognizing the significance of service provider relationships and interdependencies on operational risk, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) proposed an update to its Cybersecurity Framework on January 10, 2017. The proposed changes in version 1.1 are in draft form pending a comment period which is open until April 10, 2017. The draft proposes to amend the Cybersecurity Framework by:

  • Adding a new section on cybersecurity measurement to help define consistent terminology for aligning business actions, results, cybersecurity expenditures, and cybersecurity metrics
  • Updating the Framework Core by adding a new category within the Identify function for Supply Chain Risk Management (ID.SC), which is essentially a focus on the policies, procedures, and controls to manage the risks posed by a firm’s third party vendors and service providers. The new category will include, among other things, an assessment of whether vendors are appropriately identified, prioritized, required to adhere to certain contractual obligations for information security, monitored for compliance with such terms, and included within the scope of business continuity testing.
  • Enhancing the Protect -> Access Control category (PR.AC) to include authentication, authorization, and identity verification, and renaming the category as “Identity Management and Access Control” to reflect that access is closely tied to an understanding of the identity of the party requesting access
  • Adding explanatory text throughout the Framework to describe how Implementation Tiers can be used in conjunction with the Current Profile and Target Profile. A tier is a way to benchmark the strength of a firm’s cybersecurity program, with higher tiers reflecting a more comprehensive and proactive program. The tiers are: Tier 1 (Partial), Tier 2 (Risk Informed), Tier 3 (Repeatable), and Tier 4 (Adaptive).

A redlined version of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework as updated by the proposed draft is available here.

Related Content

Latest Content

When Policies, Procedures and Testing Protocols Aren’t Enough…

The Compliance Program Rule continues to be a powerful tool for SEC enforcement, recently used by the SEC to address trading away in wrap accounts, misappropriation of retail client assets, and the misuse of an omnibus account. Advisory firms had written policies and procedures and testing protocols, but they were not good enough; are yours? … Continued

The Compliance Professionals Guide to Effective Trade Desk Monitoring

Global regulators continue to enhance their ability to monitor the activities of market participants through a combination of new rules, filing requirements, and upgrades to surveillance technologies. As a result, many market participants, including both buy-and sell-side firms, need to re-assess how they currently monitor the trading desk, and whether new policies and procedures are … Continued

How Do You Supervise for SEC Pay-to-Play Violations?

If you wanted more information about the contours of the SEC’s Pay-to-Play Rule, or how the SEC may enforce it, three recent Settlement Orders against large investment advisers for “over de minimis” political contributions provide some insight regarding one of the prohibitions: Contributions by Covered Associates to certain Government Officials over the specified Exception amount (capitalized words are terms in the … Continued

Do your Fund Documents Clearly Disclose Receipt of Accelerated Monitoring Fees?

Somewhat more reminiscent of the broken-windows enforcement era, two affiliated private equity advisers managing billions settled with the SEC on charges that they failed to make pre-commitment disclosures in fund governing documents related to accelerated fees received from portfolio companies. Interestingly, according to the Settlement Order, the advisers had made some disclosures in fund documents … Continued

With New Risk Alert, SEC Doubles Down on Best Execution

On July 11, 2018, the SEC issued a Risk Alert outlining commonly found compliance issues related to best execution by investment advisers. Advisers have an obligation to seek best execution of client transactions, taking into consideration quantitative factors such as execution quality and commission rate, as well as more qualitative factors such as the value … Continued

Mailing List

Subscribe to the Ascendant Compliance email list for the latest compliance resources, conferences, ComplianceCasts™, and more.

Loading form...

Contact Us

Ascendant works together with clients to identify and assess critical needs through customized plans. If you need assistance with compliance functions, regulatory services, cybersecurity or technology tools, we’d love to speak with you.